I would like to dedicate this Topic to practical Chas ET aural tuning. In my hope, this may eventually help to gain Chas beating whole.

This thread is not intended for discussing different tunings or techniques, nor sequencies efficiency. It is meant as the long-distance “handing on” of my approach, what may substitute a personal directioning of mine for sharing Chas Theory's Temperament.

Please, do not expect regular posting. I will most appreciate any kind of feedback from aural tuners and/or music involved people, through PM or e-mail. In this Topic then, we may talk about individual progress details.


Best regards, a.c.



CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 (Granpianoman) on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

Presentation on PW and discussion (May 07, 2009) :
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

It sounds like a professional quality tuning to me, Alfredo but frankly I sorely miss the color in temperament I am used to hearing with my tunings. The octave stretching is quite beautiful however and the overall sound is very clear.

.....................say
......................I
...............want
...................to
...........choose
....................a
the correct way is tuning a preparatory beats and frequencies curve
...................that
...................leads
.........................to
.......................Chas
......................beating
..........................whole


From mid-section to the highest tones, I need to tune mid-strings at higher pitches, so that all check intervals, in those sections, will have a "preparatory" faster beat rate progression.

Why?

Bill, Kent, thank you.

Tuning a piano may be compared to forging a bow.

A piano reacts quite like a stringed bow and, like a bow, a piano must have its correct "at rest" tension.

The piano's "at rest" tension can return our favorite tuning form. Arguing from analogy, I forge a bow by considering its dynamics. Pins may then be compared to arrows.

I pull the string and stretch my bow as due, then I’m aiming my arrow (the pin) at my target (Chas form), and let my bow itself (the piano) adjust to its consequent "at rest" tension. This overall tension can draw my favorite form.

So, I never go directly for the Chas form. I’m not the one that gains it, I only determine the premises. Chas EB-ET temperament can only be the result of correct evaluation of all the factors mentioned below. This factors call for an accentuated stretch for all intervals, what I refer to as Chas Preparatory Tuning.

The many tons of mixtured forces in the piano, how the strings tension and load increase (or decrease) will effect the whole structure, together with the strings three-lengths adjustements. So, before and during my tuning, I’m there to evaluate the settling down parabola.

It is indeed like calculating an arrow’s trajectory, in consideration of wind and gravity.

a.c.


CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 (Granpianoman) on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

Presentation on PW and discussion (May 07, 2009) :
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

How far from just is the piano when you start ?

Hi Kamin,

Good point, but I would not have a clue. The one you mention is one of the variables, like the person that will open us the door.

Regards, a.c.

Why do you feel the need to use flowery analogy in speaking with experienced professional tuners?



Specifically, why not?

Are you claiming that your temperament and/or stretch level of your tuning requires some special technique that must be followed in order for a professional tuner to execute your tuning with stable results?

Hello Kent,

we can discuss about my needs, flowers, analogies, pro tuning and special techniques here:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

Regards, a.c.

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 (Granpianoman) on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

Presentation on PW and discussion (May 07, 2009) :
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

My questions are within the scope of this topic, are they not?

To repeat:

Why do you feel the need to use flowery analogy in speaking with experienced professional tuners?

Are you claiming that your temperament and/or stretch level of your tuning requires some special technique that must be followed in order for a professional tuner to execute your tuning with stable results?

Bill, Kent, you have already my reply here:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

This thread is not intended for discussing different tunings or techniques, nor sequencies efficiency. I will most appreciate any kind of feedback from aural tuners and/or music involved people, through PM or e-mail.

In this Topic then, we may talk about individual progress details.


...........................(- (- (- (- (- (- (+) -) -) -) -) -) -)


Tuning a piano may be compared to forging a bow.

A piano reacts quite like a stringed bow and, like a bow, a piano must have its correct "at rest" tension.

The piano's "at rest" tension can return our favorite tuning form. Arguing from analogy, I forge a bow by considering its dynamics. Pins may then be compared to arrows.

I pull the string and stretch my bow as due, then I’m aiming my arrow (the pin) at my target (Chas form), and let my bow itself (the piano) adjust to its consequent "at rest" tension. This overall tension can draw my favorite form.

So, I never go directly for the Chas form. I’m not the one that gains it, I only determine the premises. Chas EB-ET temperament can only be the result of correct evaluation of all the factors mentioned below. This factors call for an accentuated stretch for all intervals, what I refer to as Chas Preparatory Tuning.

The many tons of mixtured forces in the piano, how the strings tension and load increase (or decrease) will effect the whole structure, together with the strings three-lengths adjustements. So, before and during my tuning, I’m there to evaluate the settling down parabola.

It is indeed like calculating an arrow’s trajectory, in consideration of wind and gravity.

a.c.


CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 (Granpianoman) on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

Presentation on PW and discussion (May 07, 2009) :
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

Was the link you posted intended to be bogus?



Is it acceptable, then, to provide feedback stating that no progress is possible, given the lack of information forthcoming from you?

I repeat:

Are you claiming that your temperament and/or stretch level of your tuning requires some special technique that must be followed in order for a professional tuner to execute your tuning with stable results?

Will you be posting here corrected instructions for your temperament, as has been requested before?

was not yet the settling bowl parabola yet used ?

But I begin to be annoyed to have to try to understand where you man want to come by with that suspense and prophetic things. Are you in a sect of some sort ?

I have also find that one " the bow when plucked, tone as a bow : boink !"

We need enthusiastic people, but please how do you want us to take you seriously ? Kens inquiry was serious, is it necessary to raise pitch on the whole piano befor meditating a Chas tuning .

About bowing, or natural settling, yes a grand, preferently without plate bushing, could settle in a natural way hence no active pin setting from the tuner, the pianist do the job, but I learned to rely not so much to that, If you think of that.

Kent,

I did link my reply to you, it is still there. I apologize for the forthcoming amount of informations, it is mainly relative to my time disposal.

This thread is meant as the long-distance “handing on” of my approach. It is not intended for discussing different approaches, tunings or techniques, nor sequencies efficiency.

Please mind, nobody here is forced into any kind of belief. I’m simply talking about my personal experience, one of many possible routes, and about my favorite tuning temperament, in my personal way. Nobody then is forced into this reading and, if it was not satisfactory, this whole thread may as well be ignored.

Anybody may have sincere reasons for sharing Theories, approaches, tunings, techniques, linguistic styles and/or forms of communication. If anyone wanted to talk about their own issues, or deepen a subject, I kindly ask he/she either to choose the most appropriate Topic (there is plenty) or to start his/her own new Topic.

For discussing about Chas EB-ET Theory, you are welcome here:

http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html


Regards, a.c.


CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 (Granpianoman) on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

Presentation on PW and discussion (May 07, 2009) :
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthrea...%20-%20CHA.html

.

With the analogy of a piano being a bow and when releasing the tension the tuning is created, my question is a little different than Kamin’s:



My question is: “Just how far will the piano fly when you finish?”

Given that the topic is named "CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING", is it not appropriate to inquire about why a preparatory tuning is needed?



How, exactly, do you intend to disseminate your technique if you won't discuss it?

Repeating, do you plan to post a corrected version of your tuning instructions, as previously requested?



Is it intentional that you are repeatedly posting this broken link?

"Given that the topic is named "CHAS PREPARATORY TUNING", is it not appropriate to inquire about why a preparatory tuning is needed?"...

Kent, you can also read about that in Chas first Topic. Sorry, for the link, yesterday it was working. May I ask you to kindly change attitude? As I have said, nobody is forced into this reading. a.c.

........(- (- (- (o) -) -) -)

/-------------------------------//
------------------------------//

......................l
......................l
.....................a
.....................w
.....................a
.....................d
.....................n
.....................o
.....................y
.....................e
.....................b
.....................k
.....................o
.....................o
......................l
.....................a
.....................n
.....................n
.....................a
.....................w
......................I
......................y
......................a
......................s

..a.v....n.l....o.t..........l.a.......b.o
.h...e.o...y.g....o......e...s....c.....a
I........................n.e.......t.i..........r.d

considering my wheight

............................................t......i
.....................................i..................n
..............................t.............................t
.......................e.......................................h
..................s................................................i
.............y......................................................s
........a............................................................w
....m.................................................................a
I..........................................................................y


When I modify the strings load on the bridge and the soundboard, I consider the elasticity factor. The bridge and the sounboard can only adjust then under a correct distribution of the new load, only then I get my favorite tuning.

.

Alfredo:

Maybe you are talking about what is called a "pitch raise." A piano is below pitch, so it is roughly tuned a little above pitch but ends up about on pitch. Then it is given a finer tuning. Of course some parts of the piano may be lower than others and the "a little above pitch" might be more like "quite a bit above pitch."

Is this what you are doing when a piano is below pitch, or do you need to do this regardless of where the piano's pitch starts at? I mean, if there is a piano that you tune regularly, do you do this preparation tuning every time?

Huh!!!

Alfredo, you did not refrain on those champaign bottles, please wait a little Christmas is only in a few days !!

That said, Cheers !

The champaign is still there, promise, it must have been that recent cake...fine patisserie?

Anyway...Cheers!

.

Even if there is no wind, an arrow draws a curved trajectory.

Even when I tune a piano very close to my favorite sound whole, say 99%, I never tune Chas on mid-strings, I’ll go for a preparatory tuning, as described above. I always consider the adjustments that will take place, possibly the infinitesimal ones too, and I do everything I can for these adjustments to take place.

If that piano was very very close to my favorite order, say 99.999%, on mid-strings it would (more or less) keep the preparatory tuning I talk about, then it may be a question of unisons. In any case, only in peculiar circumstances do I accept to “repair” my tuning, normally I restart from the beginning.

A piano may look like an ordinary piece of furniture, but in fact, due to the tons of tension it holds, we know that a piano is more an instrument that is constantly “in progress”.

My favorite sound beating-whole can only be the result of a dynamic factor, the piano structure’s adjustments. I determine the premises, and act, so that Chas may result from these premises through the piano’s settling down. Only then can I think of it as a temporary stable condition.

My tuning is causing these factors, determining the premises and driving the adjustments, expecting and wanting them in one, acting and waiting for them to release eventually my favorite sound whole.

a.c.

.

Pianos, I only talk to them, with a new one I ask gently if I'll have trouble with him and generally he say no and stay quiet (I've seen that in a movie where the guy comes to jail, the green line, it works).

Sometime only if I put my case near the piano it sound better !

...and if HE'S a SHE does she slap you in the face too?

Nope, once one step on my toe, but as I wear security shoes I smiled and took my hammer, the piano was only badly in need of tuning (that makes them nervous)

Is the grand piano feminine, in English ? (never thought of that).
Here the grand is pretty much masculine, as the vertical.
Special mention to the factory joke about the 3 lid props BTW, (we are in the working class, for most, don't forget even if mention of those terms disappear from common language some years ago)

Alfredo:

I understand that measurements of frequencies of single strings have been compared to a tuned unison with all three strings sounding together. A drop in pitch has been observed. But since a higher partial is measured, I am not sure if it is the fundamental frequency that changes or if it is the effective iH of the strings that change and therefore the frequency of the partials and the beat rate of the tuning intervals. This effect is an argument for tuning unisons as you go and for adding a bit of extra stretch when tuning an octave so that when the other strings of the unison are tuned the pitch will settle where it belongs.

Perhaps this is what you are experiencing rather than the piano’s tension equalizing.

In regards to tension equalization, something I have noticed when doing a preparatory pitch raise is that too much of an overshoot does not seem to matter as much as even a little bit of undershoot.

So how do we setup that CHas preparatory tuning ?

And the real thing ?

These contents were posted on Chas Topic on 5/23/09 (somehow corrected (thanks to Jeff Deutschle)):

I decided to go further my tuning sequence mainly for two reasons: firstly, because hundreds of interesting pages have and are been written about the most original and reasonable sequencies, none of them leading to a solid, reliable theory that could deal with inharmonicity, so leaving tuners in a state of uncertainty. A sequence will always be debatable, a mathematical evidence will not. Secondly, because I do not think the sequence I use is any special, nor time saving or more confortable for listening to or comparing beats. In my opinion, any sequence can eventually work, as long as you clearly know what you can be aiming at and why, and how and where you’ll get it.

The only novelty may regard the overall approach and the interrelation of SBI, i.e. 8ves, 4ths and 5ths beat curves, the research's results that opened to Chas. Chromatic 4ths are not only similar, going up the scale they get tiny little wider. Chromatic 5ths are not only similar, from low notes they first stretch down and get tiny little narrower, in between G3 and G4 they invert and stretch up toward there pure ratio (tuning centre strings), going tiny less and less narrow.

An italian collegue pointed out that SBI are much harder to evaluate than RBI. True, I would also agree in saying that RBI give you the general idea of what you are doing in the shortest lapse of time. Nevertheless in my opinion, anyone truly wanting to achieve excellence in aural tuning, would have to master the maximum control of any interval’s beat. A matter of wrist, both in the figurative and the anathomic sense, and a matter of rhythmics. In my case, SBI control took me to the 7th decimal point (section 4.5).

So what happened was, first I empirically calculated the univocal SBI and RBI chromatic proportional order, there I could notice an astonishing euphonic set that would prove how inharmonicity can be made tractable. Then I simply elaborated its essence, to finally construct an updated and comprehensive ET model, reliable in both theoretical and practical terms. Since I know all this comes from practice, simplicity and utmost exactitude, I’m disclosing Chas model with a serene soul.

In tuning, as I have learned, each sound is only temporarly tuned, since every single added sound may indicate the need to correct previously tuned notes. At the end, it is the Chas form that releases me from all doubts and only then I am absolutely certain to have done my best. Anyway, here are a few suggestions introducing and commenting the sequence.

A - do not take this tuning sequence as a must -
B - octaves, 4ths and 5ths shape the skelethon of the entire set -
C - start tuning only middle string, mute from C6 down to strings crossing, dampers up -
D - tuning single strings and unisons, get always the same moderate sound intensity -
E - octaves have a low beat-threshold and a high beat-threshold, this helps me when tuning octaves in middle register -
F - possibly, stabilize middle string frequencies by playing a Forte sound -
G – do not tire your ears, by playing louder you will not hear better nor more -

sharp or flat is referred to the note we are ment to tune. The already-tuned note is in bracket -

Step 1 – A4 – from 440.0 Hz to 442.0 Hz (concert or studio) - from 442.0 to 443.0 (for flat pianos)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 2 – (A4)-A3 - tiny little flat, just on the beating threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 3 – (A3)-D4-(A4) - sharp, close to 1 beat/sec. – D4-(A4) faintly beating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 4 – (A3)-E4 - flat
check overlaping 5ths and adjacent 4ths to set up Chas ET EB octave:
A3-E4 about 1,5 beat/3s - sensibly faster than D4-A4
E4-A4 about 2 beats/1s - sensibly faster than A3-D4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 5 – (E4)-B3 – flat - tiny little faster beat than A3-D4, sensibly slower beat than E4-A4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 6 – (B3)-F#4 - flat - little slower beat than A3-E4 since 5ths have already inverted
faster beat than D4-A4 evaluate M6 A3-F#4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 7 – (F#4)-C#4 – flat - faster beat than E4-B3, sensibly slower beat than E4-A4
evaluate two M3’s progression + one M6
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 8 – (C#4)-G#4 – flat - slower beat than B3-F#4, tiny little faster than D4-A4
evaluate three M3’s progression + two M6’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 9 – (G#4)-D#4 – flat - tiny little slower beat than E4-(A4), faster than F#4-C#4
evaluate four M3’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 10 – (D#4)-A#3 – flat - tiny little faster beat than A3-D4, tiny little slower than E4-B3
evaluate five M3’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 11 – (A#3)-F4 – flat - tiny little slower beat than A3-E4,
tiny little faster beat than B3-F#4
evaluate seven M3’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So far, apart from A3-D4, we have stretched "flat" - now we’ll stretch "sharp"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 12 – (D4)-G4 – sharp - tiny little slower beat than G#4-D#4, faster beat than F#4-C#4
evaluate eight M3’s progression + three M6’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 13 – (G4)-C4 - sharp - tiny little slower beat than B3-F#4,
tiny little faster beat than C#4-G#4 evaluate nine M3’s progression + four M6’s progression
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beats curves are meant to be tuned temporarly. While you are tuning, bear all (few) doubts in mind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 14 – (A#3)-A#4 – sharp - increase octaves beat’s speed very slowly – 5ths go very, very slowly towards pure – F4-A#4 tiny little faster beat than D4-A4, as for the next 4ths
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the octave beat threshold, first signs of beating come to us in a shorter and shorter lapse of time, this helps to S-shape octaves stretch
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 15 – (B3)-B4 - sharp - increase octaves beats rate very, very slowly - 5ths towards pure
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 16 – (C4)-C5 - sharp - increase octaves beats rate very slowly - 5ths towards pure
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 17 – (C#4)-C#5 - sharp - increase octaves beats rate very slowly – 5ths start transiting pure - evaluate one M10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 18 – (D4)-D5 - sharp - increase octaves beats rate very slowly – 5ths are transiting pure - evaluate M10’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 19 – (D#4)-D#5 - sharp - increase octaves beats speed very slowly – 5ths are transiting pure - evaluate M10’s progression
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 20 – (E4)-E5 - sharp - increase octaves beats speed very slowly –
5ths have transited pure, evaluate M10’s progression –
chromatic M12s, like A3-E5 must be constant and temporarly tuned pure (on normally out of tune pianos) -
Step 21 – (F4)-F5 – sharp
Step 22 – (F#4)-F#5 – sharp
Step 23 – (G4)-G5 – sharp
Step 24 – (G#4)-G#5 – sharp
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 25 – A4-A5 – double octaves like A3-A5 must be constant and temporarly beat with a rate of about 3b/2s, or 3/2 bps
increase octaves beats speed very slowly –
5ths are very slowly widening, evaluate M10’s progression –
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 26 – (A#4)-A#5 – sharp - check 10ths, pure 12ths, wide 15ths, let 5ths go slowly wider
Step 27 – (B4)-B5 – sharp - check 10ths, pure 12ths, wide 15ths, let 5ths go slowly wider
Step 28 – (C5)-C6 – sharp - check 10ths, pure 12ths, wide 15ths, let 5ths go slowly wider
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go back down for G#3 to lower notes using SBI, RBI and EB, never lose control of beats progressions for all intervals. 5ths will get slower, so will 4ths. Improve A#4 with F#3 and D#3. Unison all these registers from your left hand moving right, except last muted string on C6, then go up to higher notes. Chas delta-wide 15ths and delta-narrow 12ths beat’s rate is about 1b/3s or 1/3 bps.

Tune as you know, middle string first, then unison previous note’s right string (C6), next left (C#6), tune next middle (D6), unison previous right (C#6), next left, tune next middle and so on, checking also M17ths progression. While tuning, do not stop evaluating strings and sound-board rigidity/elasticity, so you’ll be able to conveniently tune centre strings.

a.c.

.

Thanks so much ALfredo,

What a huge job to describe and theorize on that ! I said esoteric not because of the method but the way you present it, but I suppose I can get used to your way to express things.

I believe I'll have a better picture of what you are doing while doing it myself.

I'll ask my Brother, which is violonist, what he think about large fifths (and small ones ! )
He plays very just, and with many pianists (or even an organist once)

Hopefully he also have some humour ! Ill let you know what he say.

http://www.amazon.com/Bach-parodies-transcriptions-Johann-Sebastian/dp/B00166GMGS

Thank you and please post other recordings if possible (with voiced piano) Best regards.

May I respectfully suggest that you are not familiar with modern temperament directions, which contain much specific detail not included in your directions.

Many sets of directions have been published. I myself have published a set of directions for some decades; my directions are known to have been helpful to many learning piano tuning.

My directions are presently somewhat out-of-date, but remain useful.

Pending a needed update, the latest version of my directions may be seen at:

files.me.com/kentswafford/0p8fok

I hope my directions will provide at least one example of a modern set of temperament directions.

Thanks Kent, I very much appreciate the chance you offer me. That address do not seem to work though, what can I do?

a.c.

.

Hello Alfredo !

I could not be there for some days, but I'll give you news soon !


The kind of thing that makes the explanations may be not precise enough is for instance "first octave barely beating"

To know how much I may know what kind of "proof" to be used and how many beats differences. for instance, 1 beat in 5 seconds for M3d/10th (or4:2 if expressed differntly)

That said, on a Fazioli concert grand for instance, (from memory ) you cant have a noticeable difference between 6:3 and 4:2 , iH is simply too low there so the trade of is not the way to have the best temperament octave.

I approach that this way :
I tune 2 doublets unisons that "speaks"
Octave may speak the same, I only may be careful with the tendency to have too little stretched octaves that way.

Your method of pulling one string higher than the final wanted pitch is also a "guess and hope method" , or you count of the energy blend coming from the instrument to "lock" the octave (which is certainly possible but difficult to prove, we are now in "artistic tuning" and not following a model.

I have no particular problems with rolling octaves, as long as the roll is not out of phase , or perceived, but depending of the output I'll lessen that ( if FBI begin to raise speed too much).

Seem to me that on low iH instruments, as harpsichords, tuning models that allow beating octaves leave no place for the inherent acoustic of the instrument, it scream, it catch the ear, eventually musically but not in its most natural way. Some like that impression of constant suspense and it clean minor harmony, but I've seen very negatives reactions from musicians with some comments as " Bontempi tone"
(not talking of your particular method here, that is more in the Cordier reaction)

It could be cultural, why not, anyway a taste affair.

Till next time, and have a nice end of 2009 !

All of the following are correct paths to the file:

files.me.com/kentswafford/0p8fok

http://files.me.com/kentswafford/0p8fok

http://www.kentswafford.com/EWW/ewwt.pdf

Thanks Kamin, I'll reply asap, it will be 2010!!

Thanks Kent, they are correct paths indeed, I'll study your paper and reply to you too. To All

-(----------------------- 20 * HAPPY NEW YEAR *10
.

Happy new also, , sorry it is just to have my name on the whole front page !!!

Best regards '(no reply needed !!!)

Chas Preparatory Tuning is referred to centre-strings-tuning and it comes out to be mindful tuning:

Chas ET octaves are progressive.

Chas 4ths are progressive. The 4ths beat rate progression invert on C3.
Chas 5ths are progressive. The 5ths beat rate progression invert on E4 (tuning centre strings).

Octaves beat-rise-time – Propensity to beat

------------------------TIME
I-----I------I--------I----------I--------I------I-----I---I
A0...A1.....A2........A3...........A4........A5.......A6...A7..C8


In Chas preparatory tuning, octaves are wide and progressive. In order to distribute the octaves progression I evaluate the “propensity to beat”, in other words I calculate the TIME needed for the beat to rise. Midrange octaves do not beat, though octaves swell towards beating.

So I set the A3-A4 octave on the edge (or soil) of the beat (on centre string) and, little by little, this stretch is to be chromaticaly widened. Then, going towards high and low notes, the octave’s beat gets more and more defined, i.e. it rises in a shorter and shorter time, as shown above. Only for the highest octaves I can count progressive beating around 1/bps or little more.

The octave’s beat rate is always relative to all the other intervals beat rate, as in a system of levers, so I draw the form with SBI and RBI. To evaluate the stretch-curve in practice, I use 12ths as a reference (on centre strings). In fact A3-E5 - on centre string – has to be apparently beatless (3:1 ratio). So will be the next chromatic 12ths, when tuning centre strings upwards.

This will produce constant wide 15ths, beating at about 3/2 bps, on centre string. Just unisoning left and right strings will correct these intervals and gain the Chas ET form in stable terms, with the form’s constant and opposite equal beating 12ths and 15ths all along the keyboard.

a.c.

Hello ALfredo,

You are welcome to Paris, of course, thanks for proposal.

Thank you for your clearing , it begin to comes thru my slow mind !.

What I am not exactly understanding is why there is any interest in having the piano tuned as if it was a single chord, it probably misses some movement along the keyboard harmonically then, as to me the stretch evolving gave that , and pianist most probably play with it while improvising.

I see tuning as a reproduction more or less precise because of the piano iH, of a temperament, it can be based on an octave or include yet corrections in prevision of the highest and lowest regions, it can be more tonal or more based on the inharmonic spectra of the notes (inharmonicity is low in the medium range but yet perceived, hopefully, if not the tone is not as crisp as a piano tone.)

I have yet tried yesterday with your inversion in mind, and finishing with the 12th 15th evening so 4th 5th temperament with that inversion gives strange results, no harshness but one have to get use to that.

I had not time to record the piano, it will be done later (may be , aint my instrument)

I may say that my first impression is that 12th 15th evening will correct any kind of temperament and make the piano then playeable by reconciliation of the medium tweaks and the treble and bass (hopefully on pianos we have often much room for cheats !)

second impression is that 12th 15th is a very valuable and quiet method to raise in the treble
Also very comfortable to find pitches in the low basses when the wires are dumb (old)

I tuned that 122M Grotrian (while "listening" to the concerto "the Emporor' so to be sure to not tune as usually) and it had a nice resonance in the end (despite a slow third in the middle of temperament).

But I did not came near any of the slow beats of the tenths and 17th of the begin of your recording, the medium octaves are not 2:1 to my ears they need a little more stretch so the beginning of the treble sticks out more easely.

May be compromizing the 12th and the double octave is a good way to determine the size of the octave while going up and down but I am unsure it is the same for the temperament or the low medium range.

You say that ih is poor in the medium. do you have the numbers ? I just checked and it looks like even on a concert grand the ih of the A3 is around the iH of the lowest plain wires, anyway my experience have been that iH change your first octave as any other note on the piano, even on a concert grand you cant reconcilite all intervals, there is a differnece between 6:3 and 4:2, and the speed of intervals vary depending of the piano.

If your method have to be matheamtically valid you cant say "it is low so does not matter" because it is a variable and the primarly goal of tuning is to make an interesting use of the iH of the piano.

By evidence the piano is driving the beats speed, but I relate to that thoses too slow 10ths I hear in the beginning of the recording.

That said you certainly have find a way to have a nice resonance within the instrument.
I may respectfully ask you : do you play piano ? I know some very talented concert tuner which is unable to play and to check the harmonic behaviour of a piano (hense stick to what he learned and then please most pianists)

I was lucky enough to grow within a musician family so it sort of sharpen my ears (that have been a little beaten by my tuning days but I stay acute I guess!)

When I say that contrast is necessary I mean that it may be too much perceived if a tuning is based on one interval only (while it is highly pleayeable to have progressive RBI, they may progress in speed not to slowly so to pealse the musican's ear)

Your last explanations give me material, so Ill write again after having tried with that method too.

I'll answer on the preparatory tuning, I guess you have some part of mysticism that makes you believe that the piano will "self tune" in some way after you tense the middle string. I believe you may be right in that case but probably only if the piano is yet not far from final pitch.

It would be interesting to do your tuning with the right pedal engaged and see how the pitch evolve.

If not there are % that can be used to ascertain where the final pitch will be (some EDT have good solution to that problem, but based on an unison tuning as we go, so your approach make sense , but I see no maths at that point, for instance how do you deal with piano which is 4 cts low how do you evaluate the necessary raise).

A customer , piano teacher that was math teaching in a precedent life, told me when I showed her the debate on your presentation of CHAS, that once you look for mathematic proof of something you had find by trial, you always find a way for justification.

Being not at a sufficient level of maths to say so I would not comment, but that seem to be what most have say on the forum
while I believe it should be less sterile in the discussion if my colleagues directly try to tune with your recipe, then discuss later.)


Best regards.

Hello Kamin, you kindly write:

...“What I am not exactly understanding is why there is any interest in having the piano tuned as if it was a single chord, it probably misses some movement along the keyboard harmonically then, as to me the stretch evolving gave that , and pianist most probably play with it while improvising.”...

I tune centre strings – the way I was taught – mainly for distributing strings load on the bridge and, while the piano is settling, for correcting (in case) only one string.

...“I see tuning as a reproduction more or less precise because of the piano iH, of a temperament, it can be based on an octave or include yet corrections in prevision of the highest and lowest regions, it can be more tonal or more based on the inharmonic spectra of the notes (inharmonicity is low in the medium range but yet perceived, hopefully, if not the tone is not as crisp as a piano tone.)”...

In my experience, iH can influence my tuning form very very little, much less than usually lamented. In any case, I could draw the qualities of Chas form and get its symmetric properties out, even on very small pianos.

...“I have yet tried yesterday with your inversion in mind, and finishing with the 12th 15th evening so 4th 5th temperament with that inversion gives strange results, no harshness but one have to get use to that.”...

Yes, most probably it will be strange at the beginning.

...“I may say that my first impression is that 12th 15th evening will correct any kind of temperament and make the piano then playeable by reconciliation of the medium tweaks and the treble and bass (hopefully on pianos we have often much room for cheats !)”...

Well, if one uses it to correct any kind of temperament, a part of the smoothness of the overall progressions will be lost, together with a part of the beats synchronism, what effects the overall resonance. In any case, one could still have a precise reference given by Chas Theory's Delta rule for 88 tones ET tuning.

...“second impression is that 12th 15th is a very valuable and quiet method to raise in the treble
Also very comfortable to find pitches in the low basses when the wires are dumb (old)”...

I agree. When I tune, I find very confortable having precise checks and control opportunity. Chas Pre-form's tuning displays the curves for all intervals, so I get plenty of chances to check this Pre-form and to know what I'm doing.

...“I tuned that 122M Grotrian (while "listening" to the concerto "the Emporor' so to be sure to not tune as usually) and it had a nice resonance in the end (despite a slow third in the middle of temperament).”...

Good, I’m glad.

...“But I did not came near any of the slow beats of the tenths and 17th of the begin of your recording, the medium octaves are not 2:1 to my ears they need a little more stretch so the beginning of the treble sticks out more easely.”...

Is not immediate to evaluate how much the piano is going to “take back” and where, in terms of stretch and load. In a way, it remains an unknown variable, but you certainly know about this.

...”May be compromizing the 12th and the double octave is a good way to determine the size of the octave while going up and down but I am unsure it is the same for the temperament or the low medium range.”...

Chas Pre-form favours 3:1 ratio (for 12ths) and 3:2 or even wide 5ths, up the scale on centre strings. Never had problems in mid or mid-low range, I keep progressive octaves, 3rds, 6ths, well related and progressive 4ths and 5ths, and check with, 10ths, 17ths ecc. as usual.

...“You say that ih is poor in the medium. do you have the numbers ? I just checked and it looks like even on a concert grand the ih of the A3 is around the iH of the lowest plain wires, anyway my experience have been that iH change your first octave as any other note on the piano, even on a concert grand you cant reconcilite all intervals, there is a differnece between 6:3 and 4:2, and the speed of intervals vary depending of the piano.”...

In my opinion, setting with 6:3 intervals may expose you to the iH’s effects.

...“If your method have to be matheamtically valid you cant say "it is low so does not matter" because it is a variable and the primarly goal of tuning is to make an interesting use of the iH of the piano.”...

Ohi, I would not like to be extreme, I do not tune with a calculator. Chas Theory is mathematically impecable, Chas Pre-form tuning must consider all variables. Then, in my experience, defining the beats order with basic ratios, may limit iH’s influence.

...“I may respectfully ask you : do you play piano ? I know some very talented concert tuner which is unable to play and to check the harmonic behaviour of a piano (hense stick to what he learned and then please most pianists)
I was lucky enough to grow within a musician family so it sort of sharpen my ears (that have been a little beaten by my tuning days but I stay acute I guess!)”...

I’m not dedicated to piano playing, but I play the piano as a preparer’s routine. As for the rest, playing is not a passion for me, it is more of a chronic disease and a family inclination.

...“When I say that contrast is necessary I mean that it may be too much perceived if a tuning is based on one interval only”...

Chas Pre-form is drawn with all intervals, with slow and fast beats checks and proportions.

...“I'll answer on the preparatory tuning, I guess you have some part of mysticism that makes you believe that the piano will "self tune" in some way after you tense the middle string. I believe you may be right in that case but probably only if the piano is yet not far from final pitch.”...

More than faith or personal belief, it is a question of phisics. Not only for pitch-raising but always, when I charge the piano’s structure, change tensions and load the bridges, I must expect some degree of settling. I like evaluating the smallest one.

Say you play bowls, you throw the bowl and let it go towards your target. It is the bowl that gets it. Same if you shoot an arrow, you stretch your bow and let your arrow get your target. Same with tuning, I evaluate and stretch Chas Pre-form and let the piano gain it. For me this is very much realistic and respectful of how things go.

...“It would be interesting to do your tuning with the right pedal engaged and see how the pitch evolve.”...

I do not know this technique and I’m very curious about it.

...“If not there are % that can be used to ascertain where the final pitch will be (some EDT have good solution to that problem, but based on an unison tuning as we go, so your approach make sense , but I see no maths at that point, for instance how do you deal with piano which is 4 cts low how do you evaluate the necessary raise).”...

The lower (in pitch) the piano, the more approximated the tuning, then experience helps but you well know that.

...“A customer , piano teacher that was math teaching in a precedent life, told me when I showed her the debate on your presentation of CHAS, that once you look for mathematic proof of something you had find by trial, you always find a way for justification.”...

Well, I do not have research experience in other fields but, if you can, ask her how she likes the mathematical proofs and justifications adopted for any medical equipment, when she needs it.

...“Being not at a sufficient level of maths to say so I would not comment, but that seem to be what most have say on the forum
while I believe it should be less sterile in the discussion if my colleagues directly try to tune with your recipe, then discuss later.)”...

For what I’ve seen – also in other fields - when it comes to accuracy, exatitude, reliability or else related to self control, product and performance’s quality, many people prefere to talk about artistics, but I like it this way...Vive la diversité!

Best regards,

a.c.
.

I've been following these tuning discussions with great interest - technical interest only.

Alfredo writes:
Chas 4ths are progressive. The 4ths beat rate progression invert on C3.
Chas 5ths are progressive. The 5ths beat rate progression invert on E4 (tuning centre strings).

Two questions:

If beats (4ths) are supposed to invert from wide to narrow, (5ths) narrow to wide at some point in the register (it should depend on the piano, I think), then how can that be if the octaves are continuously stretched ever so slightly sharp from the tempered section and ever so slightly stretched flat below the tempered section?

How can one slightly stretch each octave note and expect those widened octaves to pave the way for an already widened 4th to become narrower? ...and narrow 5ths to be wider?

That means if the beats invert, then at some point, there are no beats, meaning that a particular 4th or 5th will be tuned pure (just)? Is this to provide a piano with the "color" as in not equal? Or do they invert in that their slow beat rates become faster/slower depending (4th or 5th) and not become pure intervals? I understand these things are better off seen/heard in-person, rather than described on a forum thread.

Sorry if I am missing something and you are repeating yourself.

I know, Issac, I will stop stretching so much the bass notes!

Glen

Sample tuning - please excuse playing errors

http://www.box.net/shared/rryoo393l4

http://www.box.net/shared/062bz3yefx

http://www.box.net/shared/27hq5la89d

Hello Glen,

I'm happy to answer your questions for anything you may find unclear or illogical.

you ask:..."Or do they invert in that their slow beat rates become faster/slower depending (4th or 5th) and not become pure intervals?"...

Take this as a practical aid, nothing numerical but it can work as general reference and as a way to represent how intervals go.

Pre-form (centre strings from C3 to C6): 4ths never become pure. From bass up to C3-F3 they faintly slow down, from C3-F3 going up they get wider. Usually I go from C3-F3 down the bass, so in this direction 4ths get wider.

C3-F3 and C3-G3 have the same beat rate, between 1/2.5 and 1/3 bps.

5ths, from bass, go faintly narrower up to A3-E4 where they invert. Usually I go first up to C6, then from A3-E4 down the bass, so in this direction 5ths get less and less narrow (centre strings).

G#3-D#4 and A#3-F4 will be equal beating (as a reference).

From A3-E4 up, 5ths (on centre strings) get less and less narrow, while 4ths keep on getting wider. After G4-C5 4ths collaps. I use 5ths and octaves to go on, both very faintly progressive, octaves-beat rising in a shorter time, 5ths getting closer and closer to pure.

It takes a while for 5ths to get wide (Pre-form on centre strings). I check 10ths progression, starting from A3-C#5.
When I get to E5, I check my first 12ths A3-E5, it has to be pure (Pre-form on centre string).

I go up on centre strings with 5ths, octaves, 10ths and pure 12ths (on centre strings), up to the first 15th A3-A5. Then I have plenty of checks intervals, and I use all of them for what I need to do/hear.

When I get to C6 I go down, from A3 to C3 (or strings crossing). Then I check the whole three octaves Pre-form temperament (C3-C6 on centre strings), and start unisoning from C3 up. You may find this Pre-form sequence (not a must) in this thread.

Regards, a.c.
.

Thanks, Alfredo,

Okay, thanks. Your fifths go from narrow-to-pure-to-wide up the register, and narrower down the register.

I strip mute as much as possible, so the center string is left unmuted - a non-issue - That is how I was taught, tune center strings first before unmuting to tune unisons. I suppose you call that pre-form.

I follow the paradigm (similar to Kent's article) to temper 4ths slightly wider than the tempered 5ths are narrow, proportional and progressive, not equal as you have it.

It seems that when I do this, then apply a slight stretch to the octaves moving in each direction from the tempered section, there is no inversion of 5ths, they only beat slower as I move up the register - it simply does not invert any 4ths or 5ths above or below the tempered section.

In order for me to start to do what you suggest, I would have to make, for example, C3-F3 and C3-G3 have the same beat rate, between 1/2.5 and 1/3 bps - that is contrary to my novice training, and certainly not out of the realm of possibility to eventually add that method to my developing tool-box.

I'll give it a try sometime and see what happens.

Thanks for the feedback.

Glen

Hello Glen,

You write:... "Your fifths go from narrow-to-pure-to-wide up the register, and narrower down the register."...

Yes, narrow-to-pure-to-wide up the register, on center strings.

..."I strip mute as much as possible,"...

I do not. I mute from midbass strings-crossing up to C6. I do not find larger muting and "one go" unisoning convenient, for stability, though it may be time saving.

..."so the center string is left unmuted - a non-issue - That is how I was taught, tune center strings first before unmuting to tune unisons. I suppose you call that pre-form."...

Does Chas Pre-form mean “muting the strings”? No.

Chas Pre-form (Preparatory Tuning) is referred to a form where all wide intervals, 3rds, 4ths, 6ths, octaves, 10ths, 15ths and so on, beat a little faster, then narrow intervals are little less narrow. This Pre-form is drawn on center strings. Actually, 12ths are pure, 5ths get progressively pure and wide (on center strings).So:

- “a more accentuated tuning curve” answers “what” Pre-form is

- “muting” or “center strings tuning” answer “how” I draw Chas Pre-form

Is it like in pitch-raising? No

Chas Pre-form is (beat wise) the tuning form I must draw for gaining Chas ET.

Posted 12/16/2009: From mid-section to the highest tones, I need to tune mid-strings at higher pitches, so that all check intervals, in those sections, will have a "preparatory" faster (wide intervals) beat rate progression.

...“I follow the paradigm (similar to Kent's article) to temper 4ths slightly wider than the tempered 5ths are narrow, proportional and progressive, not equal as you have it.”...

Careful. In my experience, only C3-F3 (4th) and C3-G3 (5th) have the same bps. I strongly suggest you to spend time for careful reading, before you need correcting yourself (takes longer).

...“It seems that when I do this, then apply a slight stretch to the octaves moving in each direction from the tempered section, there is no inversion of 5ths, they only beat slower as I move up the register - it simply does not invert any 4ths or 5ths above or below the tempered section.”...

Have you looked at the sequence? I set 5ths inversion together with A3-A4 and A3-D4 and E4-A4, right at the beginning. A3-E4 beats narrower than D4-A4.

...“In order for me to start to do what you suggest, I would have to make, for example, C3-F3 and C3-G3 have the same beat rate, between 1/2.5 and 1/3 bps - that is contrary to my novice training, and certainly not out of the realm of possibility to eventually add that method to my developing tool-box.”...

I get the same beat rate on C3-F3 and C3-G3 as a result, so only a reference point, not a starting point, at least in my personal way. I’ve never tried starting from there…but who knows?

...“I'll give it a try sometime and see what happens.”...

Let me know, a.c.
.

Thanks for sharing your own personal way when it comes to setting your intervals.

I am at the stage now in my tuning journey where developing a consistent tuning model (sequence of interval setting, sequence of checks, ensuring pin stability, with the intention of the piano producing a musical sound that satisfies my ear and enhances the customer's playing experience), is key...

...consequently, I've been paying close attention to setting the temperament using Bill's contiguous thirds and ET via Marpurg as the basis, and sticking pretty close to what Kent describes in his Every-Which-Way Temperament Sequence article - Thank you Kent and Bill!

At this early stage, the path I am on seems to be working pretty well, so at some point I will experiment with your method. I am just not that adroit to add a third method yet, but it is good to know there are many good sequences available such as yours.

Thank you for sharing your perspective and for sharing your time, Alfredo.

Glen

Glen,

I'm sure you are doing well, tuning wise. I've heard your recordings, very good indeed.

If you like a more severe comment, add recording of chromatic intervals (the main ones, including 12ths and 15ths), played slowly (3 secs each), up to the 8th octave.

One colleague of ours asked for a "short description, summarizing the CHAS method to focus the attention on the important principle, to understand the system more quickly." I post my reply here too, in case it may be of some help:

About the method, i.e. the tuning sequence, the principles are:

- the use of all intervals for an ET where all intervals are progressive
- the use of low partials beats for reducing iH's influence
- not counting but comparing beats (progressive and even beating ones)
- guessing only the first octave for eventually perfect it
- drawing a more accentuated stretch curve for compensating the piano's adjustements (let the piano get the form)
- inverting the beat rate progression of 5ths for eventually gaining even beating 12ths (narrow) and 15ths (wide) all along the keyboard.

About the system:

- the static zero-beating approach is replaced with "stable dynamism"
- zero-beating "pure" intervals do not equal "more consonant"
- beats return the strings partials qualities (energy), so giving character and tension (read colour) to each single interval
- no interval needs to be beat-less
- all intervals (all partials) can compromise for an optimum, resonant and stable beating whole
- flows of beats determine infinite sound atmospheres.

Using few words, Chas theory's approach is based on beats synchronism of only beating intervals, and synergy.

Soon I'll be writing about the string/pin/lever relation, as I think this may help controlling the effects of our tuning onto the piano's structure.

Regards, a.c.

Alfredo:

Several questions. The fourth one is really the point of this post.

1. When you speak of a preparatory tuning, do you mean what most American and Northern European tuners would call setting the bearing or setting the temperament, along with getting other notes close to the final form?

2. I'm starting to wonder if there is a separate tradition of Italian tuning and temperaments. Most of the temperaments I've examined come from Germany, France, England, and the U.S. Your terminology, and your love of metaphor, makes me wonder if Italy, or at least Sicily, has developed a parallel tradition. Who taught you to tune?

3. Was he or she in turn taught in a specific school or by a specific method that may have a name--something we could learn more about? Are there books by Italian tuners or theorists that you could point us to?

4. More specifically, I wonder about something that may seem cliched, and that I hope you will not find insulting: Is there is a tuning tradition in Italy that derives in part from accompanying singers, from bel canto? I ask this question because your playing, and tuning, have a vocal, singing quality. And your metaphor of the bow reminds me of a similar metaphor I've heard singers use when teaching about vocal projection.

Please understand that I am not not trying to flatter you by saying that your tuning sings. (But it does.) I'm instead trying to learn if there is a slightly separate Italian tradition, perhaps tied to opera and accompanying solo singers, that we can learn more about. (And I appreciate metaphors, but as Kent says, a written tuning sequence provides more precise information...)

I suspect that, behind all of this math and theory, there is
a love of singing, and a piano adapted to vocal performance. (I'm not trying to undermine your mathematical ideas--I'm praising the results, and curious to learn if the desired tone arises from a tradition.)

Thank you for your comments, Alfredo!

This past weekend, I had some extra time during one of my tunings in order experiment and learn better using some of your methods. Certainly, a wider octave stretch up the scale did contribute to the narrowed 5ths becoming more pure and the already wide 4ths becoming a bit wider. That was already happening somewhat. I found myself not wanting to have those 12ths go beyond pure above C6 or so. Perhaps it will require more practice or more stretch! Clearly, a console spinet will require a different (heavier) stretch than does a well-scaled grand piano.

Perhaps this weekend, time permitting, I will record those wider intervals (12ths) on another tuning on a grand and send them to you.

Pin and string setting are key components for me, as the stability of the tuning is accomplished there. I am wondering how the technique of pin/string setting in the unisons contributes to the string's (piano's) overall tone.

I am interested in learning more your experience(s)/method(s) in tuning unisons up and down the scale as a method of providing better tuning stability and maintaining interval widths as strings are brought up to pitch.

Single bass notes come last in the tuning for me, even after all the tri-chord unions are complete up to C8. Not sure why I do that, but it seems that the bass notes on a well-scaled piano contribute a great deal to the overall sound of the instrument. It might be that I do this to prevent stretching too much the bass, as I have had a tendency to hear a slight "roll" - (all that drama!)

BTW, I am a big fan of Kent's tuning sequences - a huge help for my speed and accuracy. Bill's ET via Marpug and progressive 3ds has been helpful as well.

Thank you, Alfredo. More tools for the toolbox for this novice!

Glen

Hi all, because, I did not get the point immediately, when Afredo says the 5ths invert, he talk of the 5 ths beats of course (not of intervals that enlarge above just).

Glen , the 12 th stay on the tempered side, the 5ths may get wider in the high treble but not in an audible way.

Yes above pure at C6 the 12ths are substracting something to the tuning. But it happens depending of the way we tune.

In ALfredo's method they are tuned pure above C5 (C6 ? it depends of the initial pitch I guess) on the middle string so to settle afterthat when unisons are done.

When enlarging the medium it allow to stay with tempered twelves more easily, it is done often .. managing the enlarging is what is difficult.

It took me some time to read that correctly.

Till next ..

P.S Jack , I don't believe there is a really different method from Italian tuners, what makes Alfredo is almost very classical in fact (nothing really out of comprehension, nor far from usual way to tune, I may say more sticking to the rules , in fact (with coherent progressiveness of all intervals).

When listening to it or seeing it done, nothing stick out as unusual (but each action is weighted).

Yes, I should have read his sequence more closely.(I was carried away by my own metaphor of a singing piano?)

If I understand correctly, the 12ths can't used as checks below A3, since checking on 3:1 would give wider M5's than are desired in the tenor and bass. Are there any other checks for the ranges below that point, using 12ths or other intervals?

Hi Glen,

you write:..."Certainly, a wider octave stretch up the scale did contribute to the narrowed 5ths becoming more pure and the already wide 4ths becoming a bit wider."...

I'd better underline that I talk about centre strings tuning. 5ths transit pure in between C5 and C6, but very faintly. Once I tune unisons, I keep 12ths (delta-narrow) and 15ths (delta-wide) as the correct form's reference. Those intervals will conferm whether my stretch evaluation on centre strings was right or not.

..."That was already happening somewhat. I found myself not wanting to have those 12ths go beyond pure above C6 or so."...

After unisons, if 12ths have gone behond pure (wide), the high register sounds sour (tart? acrid?), 10ths and 17ths are like too salty, too nervous, almost shouting.

..."Clearly, a console spinet will require a different (heavier) stretch than does a well-scaled grand piano."...

I know it is hard to believe but, maybe by referring to always the same low partials, I do not need different stretchings on small pianos, nor a different beat-net, except for mid-bass if the scaling is very poor.

..."Pin and string setting are key components for me, as the stability of the tuning is accomplished there. I am wondering how the technique of pin/string setting in the unisons contributes to the string's (piano's) overall tone."...

A great deal, that contribute is vaste. Like voicing, unisons build up the sound body, unisons determine the sound's consistency and duration, together with the sound colour. Pin setting too is foundamental, tuning's stability and pin block singing go with pin Vs string balanced opposition. Make sure that the string's tension is coherently distributed along the three sections of the string.

..."I am interested in learning more your experience(s)/method(s) in tuning unisons up and down the scale as a method of providing better tuning stability and maintaining interval widths as strings are brought up to pitch."...

You mean the order of tuning. Indeed I think that the bridge and sound-board can better adjust in that way, the changes in loading/tension are better spread out.

..."Single bass notes come last in the tuning for me, even after all the tri-chord unions are complete up to C8."...

For me too. But at that end, after the bass, I check all unisons and refine the 8th octave.

..."BTW, I am a big fan of Kent's tuning sequences - a huge help for my speed and accuracy. Bill's ET via Marpug and progressive 3ds has been helpful as well."...

Very good and thanks, I like your enthusiasm.

a.c.

.

Jake, all available intervals are checked, but in their primary beat, not by comparing beats of other intervals (hence not checking at different partial levels). for instance 5ths are listened for their 3:2 beat, not with a M6 M10 test (I know some will say it is the same !)

That is way quieter for the ear.
The idea also to check only intervals that follow each other and are not contiguous or in ladder, is easier, and install the tuner in close contact with the beat acceleration curves within the piano.

I have seen the method as being really closely in the "heart" of the subject at all times (assuming the final result wanted is understood)

I'll let Alfredo explain , so to avoid mistakes.


Because the process involves a good sence for beats speed (on one string) it may be used by beginners, they will probably learn more how to listen efficiently and understand what they have there

And when you finally have obtained a progressiveness of all beats while you did not use the usual test, you feel more confident (in the method and in your ability to realize it), that also is a good thing.


Isaac

My Bro's Raphaël Oleg (violonist) said that he liked your tuning, find it very smooth and gentle, while enlighted. (he asked if I had a grasp on the method, too..)

Jake, you ask:

...1. When you speak of a preparatory tuning, do you mean what most American and Northern European tuners would call setting the bearing or setting the temperament, along with getting other notes close to the final form?

The Pre-tuning sets the Pre-temperament, and I do not distinguish the traditional one-or-two octaves temperament from the whole keyboard's. In other words, the Pre-tuning is my (attempted) final tuning, but the piano gets the final form, i.e. the final 88 keys temperament, only when I unison. The piano's final form (where the piano will adjust) is what I have in mind when tuning centre strings, and the Pre-tuning stretch (on centre strings) needs to be a little sharper from C4 up.

...2. I'm starting to wonder if there is a separate tradition of Italian tuning and temperaments. Most of the temperaments I've examined come from Germany, France, England, and the U.S. Your terminology, and your love of metaphor, makes me wonder if Italy, or at least Sicily, has developed a parallel tradition. Who taught you to tune?

I do not think we have a separate tradition. I use metaphores in the hope to explain myself, but also because pianos issues like tension, stretch, energy and accuracy, are part of my (our?) dayly life. I was helped by two Italians and three Japanese top tuners, Otani sun, Saida sun, Osato sun.

...3. Was he or she in turn taught in a specific school or by a specific method that may have a name--something we could learn more about? Are there books by Italian tuners or theorists that you could point us to?

I think the Japanese ones may have got some hints from Germany. About Italian books, I can certainly point them to you if you wish, in the three I read I found the same mistakes about octaves and fifths, and no concern of what I'm describing.

...4. More specifically, I wonder about something that may seem cliched, and that I hope you will not find insulting: Is there is a tuning tradition in Italy that derives in part from accompanying singers, from bel canto? I ask this question because your playing, and tuning, have a vocal, singing quality. And your metaphor of the bow reminds me of a similar metaphor I've heard singers use when teaching about vocal projection.

For sure, in Italy there is a strong singing tradition. Opera singers from all over the world come to Italy for refining their technique. I like singing too but my in tune urge derives from my ear. So, I can only tell you about my family tradition, one orchestra director, one singer and many amatorial musicians.

Vocal projection has similar sounds issues: control and balancing of body tensions (piano structure), tone building (unisons), resonance of the head cavities (pin-block singing).

..."I suspect that, behind all of this math and theory, there is a love of singing, and a piano adapted to vocal performance."...

My case is a bit more extreme. I do like singing and I've got a bad desease: music in all its forms, and rhythms. When I compare beats I am on a rhythm-level, I'm there with all my intention while my ear is the supervisor.

..."(I'm not trying to undermine your mathematical ideas--I'm praising the results, and curious to learn if the desired tone arises from a tradition.)"...

Do not worry, I find you very polite. Thank you, a.c.

.

I have always used 12ths as a limit for stretch. As I am actually getting the use of the method and sequence Alfredo use, I am changing the way I consider that.
SO my answers can only be temporary !

The first octave enlarge very little, the beat begin very late. In my usual way, I let the piano and room acoustic decide of the width of that first octave (F3-F4) and check it with 6:3 4:2 with approx 1/3 bps at 4:2 level. But I have seenn and used more than that, up to 1/2 bps, and some concert tunings I've seen (a little extreme but very sonorous) had more than 1Bps. The beats are hiding in the spectra, they only push the resonance of the ocatve. If they are slow enough they couple after a little time, and the octave is heard as pure.

For what I know on a moderately stretched temperament octave all octaves toward up are highly stretched in the "standard" German Steinway concert tuning ("stretch to the max, but coherent") As much as the spectra of the piano can accept.

Hence those too vivid major harmonies in the 5th octave that can be heard in slow moves sometime.

Stretching on a well open medium lower the speed the RBI raises, and provide more global coherence.

The unison quality is more than part of the stretch in fact. their projection "push the spectra" more or less high depending of the way they are build. I wonder if we can call "opening of the unison" the fact that center string is related to the wanted justness, while the outer strings are dealing with the iH and are more or less in the high end of the spectra.

Coupling the partials, is not always allowing the fundamental to couple as soon, hence the opening of the tone.

In may usual way, I use a strong fundamental coupling that projects the whole spectra (attack tuning), then only I body the tone. (the sensation may be felt under the fingers)

That makes for 2 actions (and once coming from under) while coming from above at any time seemm more stable and keep the charging of the pinblock optimum.
At some moment the attack is also tuned, (taking the question from the opposite) it is because of the time needed for the coupling of the partials, it enlarge the attack time.

What I dont get is that I was believing that I acted on the first millisecond of tone, while there they are a consequence of the remaining, the tone is bodied from too open, if I get well the point. I may say that getting use to recognize the flow of energy within the string is a real shortcut to unisons, but the tone may be "wedged" afterthat, the other end of the spectra open. (as when correcting unisons on a concert piano).
I hope I'll get by with something more analytic after more tunings.

Hello Isaac,

I thank your Brother and you for reporting his comment. It will be meaningfull for me to also know whether he finds Chas Theory's approach (sections 2.0, 3.0) shareable or somehow obscure.

..."I have always used 12ths as a limit for stretch...I am changing the way I consider that."...

For stretch, I was used to evaluating RBIs and follow my ear for judging how much "salt" (stretch) wanting to add. Today I'm used to evaluating RBIs, add a little bit more salt in consideration of piano's dynamics, up untill I get the first 12th, A3-E5. There I get the Pre-tuning stretch's measure.

..."SO my answers can only be temporary !"...

This is grasping! Indeed a challenge, how can it be possible to grasp Time? Going along its version-in-version (O).

..."The first octave enlarge very little, the beat begin very late."...

Yes, the slow beat-rolling raises after almost 2 secs.

..."The beats are hiding in the spectra, they only push the resonance of the octave."...

Yes, nice way of describing it. All partials, in the octave intervals, want to sing. Or, the octave can sing and deliver all partial sounds in the natural order and the most lyrical way.

..."If they are slow enough they couple after a little time, and the octave is heard as pure."...

Yes, partials only need to be sung/displayed by the octave.

..."The unison quality is more than part of the stretch in fact. Their projection "push the spectra" more or less high depending of the way they are build."...

Yes, unisons can change the whole outcome.

..."I wonder if we can call "opening of the unison" the fact that center string is related to the wanted justness, while the outer strings are dealing with the iH and are more or less in the high end of the spectra."...

Open or close is in fact what we can do with the sound's body, by unisonsing.

..."Coupling the partials, is not always allowing the fundamental to couple as soon, hence the opening of the tone."...

Yes, like if partials were drained away.

..."In my usual way, I use a strong fundamental coupling that projects the whole spectra (attack tuning), then only I body the tone. (the sensation may be felt under the fingers)"...

I bear in mind two targets: sound duration and colour univocity all along the keyboard, wich I check using the "diabolus in musica": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritone

..."That makes for 2 actions (and once coming from under) while coming from above at any time seemm more stable and keep the charging of the pinblock optimum.
At some moment the attack is also tuned, (taking the question from the opposite) it is because of the time needed for the coupling of the partials, it enlarge the attack time."...

From above is how I get unisons. Turn the pin clock-wise the right amount, charge the pin anticlock-wise just a little over, i.e. little little flat, release and accompany the pin on the desired point, the correct energy relation between the string's pulling and the pin's charge. As for centre strings, also the unisons must be the correct outcome of energy balance. BTW Isaac, do you play billiards?

..."I may say that getting use to recognize the flow of energy within the string is a real shortcut to unisons, but the tone may be "wedged" afterthat, the other end of the spectra open. (as when correcting unisons on a concert piano)."...

Oh, this last one, for once, I do not get what you mean!

Best regards, Alfredo.

.

Jake, you wrote:

..."If I understand correctly, the 12ths can't used as checks below A3, since checking on 3:1 would give wider M5's than are desired in the tenor and bass. Are there any other checks for the ranges below that point, using 12ths or other intervals?"...

Below A3, i.e. tuning G#3 and down, I use 4ths (wide, pro-slackening), 5ths (narrow, pro-slackening), 6ths (pro-slackening), octaves (pro-widening), and check 10ths (pro-slackening) and so on. From C3 down, Chas 4ths invert and get wider and wider.

Isaac, you write:

..."Because the process involves a good sence for beats speed (on one string) it may be used by beginners, they will probably learn more how to listen efficiently and understand what they have there."...

Too often I've seen tuners very much concerned with beats, fearing they would not hear them, fearing to turn their lever and depart from a point, where they had causally got, wich they may never find again. In my opinion, the whole approach needs to be different.

..."And when you finally have obtained a progressiveness of all beats while you did not use the usual test, you feel more confident (in the method and in your ability to realize it), that also is a good thing."...

You are right (O). Using normal tests, we try to check some sort of equal beating, true?

Now, what is more difficult, guessing equal beating or progressiveness of chromatic intervals? Are we better in detecting equality or diversity?

About equality, we may swear two beats are equal, while not perceiving the infinitesimal long-time difference. About diversity, if we hear two different beats, say one little faster than the second one, how many chances that we are wrong are there? And that we confuse slower with faster?

Even leaving tests and exposure to iH aside, in my opinion, guessing equal beating is a hard task, it opens to errors and the banal approximations + settlings are going to sum up.

So I'd say that comparative progressiveness may be the truest and most vivid confirmation that I'm gaining my favorite tuning, ops, Pre-tuning form.

Regards, a.c.

.

Isaac,

you were wondering about energy.

On this subject, I found of interest this reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy

and the book example too: "When the book hits the floor this kinetic energy is converted into heat and sound by the impact."

Regards, a.c.

P.S.: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89nergie_potentielle

.

You may agree on one (O) foundamental factor : Relating Time or Timing.

I was a child when I was taught that every action demands its own time (do you know of any home-saying?). Only later on I could relate this principle to myself and to my actions result, depending on the object.

As for many situations now, also when I turn and charge a pin, I know I have to look for the best Time relation between what I do and how, and the effects of what I’m doing.

Many pins have their own reaction-time, each pin may demand its own time for me to charge it.

The time I spend for tightening the string, turning the pin clock-wise, from flat up to the spot and wide, it is also the time I need for "reading" the single pin’s behaviour and it may as well be the time the pin itself needs for re-adjusting its structure.


.

Alfredo:

I'm having some problems working with the Scala file for CHas in PianoTeq, partly because I'm still trying to understand CHas, and partly because I'm still trying to understand some of the intricacies of Scala:

1. I know that you don't set a separate bearing or temperament before tuning, but Scala requires that one start the tuning on one pitch. By default, that pitch is middle C. I'm not sure that's the best place to start. Would A3, the A below A=440, be a better place?

2. Does the s1 offset occur at each octave, or does it come at the start of each unit of 24 notes?

Thanks. (The Scala file that was posted on the PianoTeq site may be fine. I'm just having trouble believing that it was so easy for someone to create and get right the first time.)

Hello Jake,

..."1. I know that you don't set a separate bearing or temperament before tuning, but Scala requires that one start the tuning on one pitch. By default, that pitch is middle C. I'm not sure that's the best place to start. Would A3, the A below A=440, be a better place?"...

Only logically speacking (+ pinch of salt), it should make no difference whether you start from mid-C or another place.

..."2. Does the s1 offset occur at each octave, or does it come at the start of each unit of 24 notes?"...

I do not really know, it may depend on how the S-file expandes the unit, and/or if you can control that. One more trial could be made with 49 notes, wich is the Chas symmetry compass (R-report, section 3.4). There, by taking the semitone 24 as the centre, you gain two 15ths (+ delta, 0-24 and 24-48) and four 12ths (minus-delta). I wish I knew what S-file really needs...

..."(The Scala file that was posted on the PianoTeq site may be fine. I'm just having trouble believing that it was so easy for someone to create and get right the first time.)"...

Good approach, let's believe with a small b...he wrote "I'm impressed by the increase of harmonic resonance you get with this temperament."...but of course, that could be relative...I look forward to hearing some tests and, as you suggest, to analysing in depth.

Thank you, a.c.

.

All:

I read what the on line Pianoteq manual had to say about inharmonicity. I hope it is applied better than it was written about. Phrases something like: So called inharmonicity..., People say that manufacturese want to get rid of all inharmonicity..., and The 33 foot piano would have practically no inharmonicity... Have me wondering how iH is dealt with in the simulation.

If someone could post the frequencies of the 3rd and 4th partials of the As of a tuning I could crunch the numbers and let everyone know how they are dealing with iH.

Hi, Jeff. My impression is that the PianoTeq stretch matches on different partials in different ranges.

Regardless, here are the freqs for the 3rd and 4th partials of the A's for the PianoTeq C3, with the default stretching applied and the temperament set to ET. (One thing: PianoTeq uses Middle C = C3. Thus A3=440. I've retaining that nomenclature below.)

A-1: 82 110
A0: 165 220
A1: 330 440
A2: 660 881
A3: 1324 1770
A4: 2672 3590
A5: 5486 7488
A6: 11895 16916

It's also possible to turn off the stretching in PianoTeq, so that it's tuned to straight ET. Let me know if you want me to post the freqs with that setting, too.

Cheers.

Hi Jeff,
Philippe Guillaume from Modartt here. My first post here I think, so Hello to everybody

Here is what we wrote in the manual:
"A parameter which greatly affects the timbre (and the tuning) is the so-called inharmonicity: the more inharmonic the strings, the more the overtone frequencies of each string are driven away from their theoretical values f, 2f, 3f... and the more the piano sound will resemble a bell.
Inharmonicity decreases very rapidly with string length. Experiment by changing the String length. The difference will be most evident in the bass range. You can choose up to a 10 meter long piano! At such a size, there is almost no more inharmonicity. People say that piano manufacturers dreamed of producing pianos without inharmonicity..." (this was a bit of a humoristic touch, being myself piano tuner)

And also:
“A unique feature of Pianoteq is that tuning does not follow a pre-computed frequency table (except for the flat temperament), but takes into account the inharmonicity of the strings, in the same way a piano tuner does with acoustic pianos. Hence, the consonance of the notes is improved and the chords have a fuller and richer sound.”

Back to the subject of this thread, I would like to point the fact that for those who want to experiment the CHAS tuning in Pianoteq, they can use SCALA files and load them in Pianoteq, and if the last note in the SCALA file has a value different from 1200.0 (or 2/1), then the inharmonicity will be by-passed and the frequencies will be exactly those specified in the SCALA file. Thus exact experimenting is possible.

Here is how to proceed after creating your own scala file (below an example of an 88 notes scala file content):
- tuning section, click on the "mu" microtuning button
- import the SCALA file via the "scale" menu
- choose "88 notes scale" in the keymap menu

Example of flat tuning 88 SCALA file, copy paste the content between the dotted lines and name the file allnotesflat.scl:
-------------------------------------------------------------
! allnotesflat.scl
!
all notes flat temperament
87
!
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
800.0
900.0
1000.0
1100.0
1200.0
1300.0
1400.0
1500.0
1600.0
1700.0
1800.0
1900.0
2000.0
2100.0
2200.0
2300.0
2400.0
2500.0
2600.0
2700.0
2800.0
2900.0
3000.0
3100.0
3200.0
3300.0
3400.0
3500.0
3600.0
3700.0
3800.0
3900.0
4000.0
4100.0
4200.0
4300.0
4400.0
4500.0
4600.0
4700.0
4800.0
4900.0
5000.0
5100.0
5200.0
5300.0
5400.0
5500.0
5600.0
5700.0
5800.0
5900.0
6000.0
6100.0
6200.0
6300.0
6400.0
6500.0
6600.0
6700.0
6800.0
6900.0
7000.0
7100.0
7200.0
7300.0
7400.0
7500.0
7600.0
7700.0
7800.0
7900.0
8000.0
8100.0
8200.0
8300.0
8400.0
8500.0
8600.0
8700.0

-------------------------------------------------------------

Philippe:

Welcome aboard!

Thanks for quoting the manual. I did not think it would be appropriate for me to. It will be interesting to see what results I get from the numbers that Jake provided.

All:

Here are the calculated iH values appended to the list of frequencies for the 3rd and 4th partials that Jake graciously provided:

A-1: 82 110, iH 1.5 (see note)
A0: 165 220, iH 0.0 (see note)
A1: 330 440, iH 0.0 (see note)
A2: 660 881, iH 0.28 (see note)
A3: 1324 1770, iH 0.66
A4: 2672 3590, iH 1.89
A5: 5486 7488, iH 5.79
A6: 11895 16916, iH 15.94

NOTE: The iH values for the lower notes could not be accurately calculated due to lack of decimal places for the frequencies of the partials.

The general slope from A2 to A6 shows the iH doubling about every 8 semitones which is appropriate. Below A2 the slope cannot be determined due to the inaccuracy of the iH calculation.

Philippe:

What sort of slope is used for iH in the bass? Does the slope resemble a straight line from note 1 to note 88 on a log graph, or is it somewhat “V” shaped like the iH slope of actual pianos?

Hi, Philippe. Thanks for the explanation of how to set up PianoTeq with an 88 note scale.

3: 1324 1770, iH 0.66 at A49 is pretty standard for a modern instrument.
(I've find 0.7 with tunelab spectra analysis, but the accuracy on a pocket pc is probably so so.

Jeff, it is a V with a lower point that can vary depending on the instrument that is modelled. This lower point shifts to the left when you increase the piano size (string length parameter in the interface). For some particular historical instruments, it's more complicate than a V as there are sometimes some sudden discontinuities (broken curve).

Thanks, Philippe:

Great! It seems that the simulator should reproduce the tuning of a well scaled piano.

Hello Philippe,

I Thank you very much for your involvement and for your help on how to load Chas in Pianoteq.

The opportunity to experiment this temperament can make a great difference, since it may reveal some of this model's qualities and limitations.

Knowing about Pianoteq performances and your experience in piano tuning has been good news for me, as it is not easy to find a reliable device nor someone with both maths and tuning skills.

Chas, as many theoretical models, is meant to translate practical observations and, in this case, what I could experiment throughout my tunings.

About the chance to analyse in depth and share this new approach to the sound scale and its practical effects, I shall welcome any form of collaboration or support that you may be able to offer, at any time.

Best regards, a.c.

.

Hi Alfredo,
it's my pleasure if I can help you in some way. If ever you need precise information on the inharmonicity of a particular piano model of Pianoteq to build scala files (knowing that inharmonicity is by-passed in Pianoteq as soon as the last note is not 1200.0), do not hesitate asking me and I will provide you with the values.
Cheers,
Philippe

Hmm. May be another problem. If iH vanishes when the last note in a Scala file isn't 2x the freq of the first, iH will be turned off in PTeq when CHas is used. That's one of the things that needed testing, if I understand correctly--how the CHas temperament interacts with iH.

If an offset was specified in an 11 freq Scala file, instead of an entry that didn't equal 2X, would PTeq still detect the change on note 12, and shut off iH?

Jake, in that case (11 notes with the 11th not being 2/1) iH will be taken into account.

Jake, the iH cant be "shut down'" in my opinion, as it is a composante of the tone. a piano tone without iH may well be unrecognizeable as a piano tone (that would be an interesting test BTW)

To me, what is aborted is the use of the iH correction formula, that allow the intervals as octaves, double,s triples, to have less beats produced by the partials.
Philippe tells that it is done "as by a tuner" that mean when listening for an octave the tuner try to have it "beatless" so he tune the top note a little high of the exact 1/2 ratio, so the partials of the top note rub the less with the partials of the lower note. what size of octave daoes it provide I will know in amoment.

We can use the anglo saxon tuners terminology to "name" the octaves in regard of the way the partials are matching.
For instance if the 2nd partial of the bottom note match the first partial (funamental) of the top note of the ocatve, the ocatve is said 2:1 , if the octave is ruled an octave above the 4th partial of the bottom note join the second of the top note it is an 4:2 octave, following are 6:3 8:4 10:5 octaves, the concept say that the size (opening) of the octave vary depending of the partial match. It works up to some point, as the result is a coupling of those partials with the coupling of the real 2:1 relation that is also installed in, anyway.

Practically this emphasis the tone of the said partial, which is not always the best thing. The defect of the method is that the partials strenght vary with the voicing, so not the same combination apply in any case, and also the tuner's ear when too much trained to listen in thos high pitched regions, tend to forget to listen more fundamentally, some intervals can be "driven by the noze" in the end...

The same apply when tuning unisons in my opinion : the fundamental couple, and the partials coupling is added to that to open the tone. My usual way to tune unison by regulation of the stabilisation time of the partials install a coupling without listening much to the high partials, but with an assessment of how the energy of the attack is spread and in how much time it stabilize. Those are tactile sensations as well as listening) . But then it is easy to leave whistles in the high regions, with that approach or to have a strong tone which is mostly focused on fundamental strength, closed with lot of energy immediately.


My guess/theory is that if a tuning have a set of relation that use a "natural equilibrium between the partials, this may well contrary the iH of the piano. The strings have iH because of their stiffness, cant they tend to vibe and produce natural harmonics or no ? if so providing them a support or a fundation will help the frequencies to couple toward those (as all the frequencies tend to couple, they dont try to go apart from each other)


Then in the best case, the "natural" tuning would be provided by the center string, the coupling of the external ones taking in account the ih (focusing on the 2-3-4-4 partial match more than on fundamental. When well done the 2outer strings finish at the same exact pitch, while they dont have been tuned together (but each have been tuned to the center string)

This is what can be called "bodying the tone" . As a result, the stabilization of the attack is somehow delayed (later), but the strenght sensation remain, simply a little later. (to my trained ears, I have no idea of the time involved it may count in milliseconds I suppose)

I hope I have made a correct description of an "open" tone.

































In theory , this apply, but it is also a somewhat simplist explanation, as the voicin

Hi Jake,

just some questions, following what Philippe wrote when he was asked:

"What sort of slope is used for iH in the bass? Does the slope resemble a straight line from note 1 to note 88 on a log graph, or is it somewhat “V” shaped like the iH slope of actual pianos?

Philippe's: "Jeff, it is a V with a lower point that can vary depending on the instrument that is modelled. This lower point shifts to the left when you increase the piano size (string length parameter in the interface)."...

Today you write:..."That's one of the things that needed testing, if I understand correctly--how the CHas temperament interacts with iH."...

You are exactly on the crucial issue, and I can add only some logical elaborations that lead to more questions.

If the lower point of the iH's slope can shift to the left, depending on the increase of the string's lenth, what will the iH's slope resemble, when using the longest string?

Is the usual iH slope normally referred to 2:1 ratio? What happens when the bass frequencies and consequent strings tension are lowered, like in Chas? Is iH decreased? Should we expect the same frequencies deviation for the high notes?

About approximations: if the string's iH can be decreased (by lowering the bass strings tension and/or increasing the string's length), should we use always the same iH parameter? Should we expect the same iH's slope? The same iH that doubles every 8 semitones? Does not the semitone variate, depending on the incremental ratio?

When do we say "well scaled piano"? Only when we find the usually expected frequencies deviations? Can iH be controlled (spread?), string after string, by playing with string's lengths and diameters (first) and eventually tensions (read frequencies)?

Isaac, I'll add on your good points later.

Regards, a.c.

.

In my comprehension of the thing, when you lower the tension on a given string on agiven piano, you lower the elasticity of the wire, its stiffness raise, hence the iH.

But this is a simplist point of view.

And I suggest that the differnce when tuning with this or that "stretch" is too minimal to be effective at the iH range in an audible way.

I see more resonance quality related to coupling, and harmonic quality related to coherence in beat relations.


In scaling we try to keep the ih at a moderate level at A49 then check the progressivness to avoid jumps. But tension , iH and wire constrain are intimely related, as the fact that the wire may not stretch with too much variability or the piano will loose its tuning more easily with seasonal changes.
So in the end for a given sacle lenght not so many choices remain. Certainly some prefer high tension scales and other low tension. iH level will differ in those cases, but stay coherent within the instrument.

The lenght of the strings rule the remaining (but I did not really work on scaling as some that rescale pianos.

When talking with one of the engineer from Bechstein he said to me that there is much more in soundboard, case, and even plate behaviour than in scaling, assuming some basic rules are respected for the latest. the "rescaling trend" make him smile in that regard (but not all pianos have an ideal scale even now) .
We can have a few choices with wire style (stiffness and resistance, timbral behaviour)

One of the parameters that relate to iH and that was not much discussed is the wire constrain, or "sollicitation". It can raise to very high levels vs. the breaking limit of the wire, as it lower the iH and provide a better mechanical behaviour (more elasticity), as for Sauter pianos, if I belive in what have been said to me)
I suppose that it may relate to soundboard stiffness and impedance, then.
Those points are out of my focus by now.

High tension scale may be for instance Fazioli if my basics are good. low tension may be Bechstein.

......

Isaac, thanks for your remark, I wasn't clear when mentioning that iH would be taken into account or not in Pianoteq. What I meant is that iH will be taken into account or not for the tuning depending on the value of the last note in the scala file. But of course, in all cases, the notes will have their normal iH when played in Pianoteq.

May I ask questions about the specifics of the unison tuning for CHas, just to be sure that I understand?

1. Kamin speaks of the unisons not matching on a single partial. How precisely are the outer strings pitched slightly differently to emphasize (through equal beating) specific partials on the center string? One outer string beats equally with partial 1 and 4, for example, and the other beats equally with partial 3 and 6, making the tone evolve towards consonance so that the energy isn't dissipated too fast? In other words, do you listen for these specific beats as you tune the upper unisons? (I understand that they are coupled, also, so that per Weinreich, their interaction in time is actually more complex than I'm acknowledging. I'm just trying to understand the intended pitching of the outer strings as heard during tuning.)

2. How far have people gone in the direction of reducing the "stretch" in tunings and using the raised unisons to reduce the perceived iH? In other words, I can imagine a piano tuned with very little stretch in the upper regions (and CHas has less than some tunings), if the unisons pull the perceived pitch higher by beating with harmonic partials. Are there specific tunings or mistunings or discussions\experiments in this direction that anyone could point me towards? ( I can imagine things like lowering the tension\diapason very slightly and then making the unisons raise the perceived pitch.)

(As an aside: I experimented with pushing that idea a little further one night in PianoTeq, lowering the pitch of some notes past narrowing the octaves, so some notes wavered near flat, and then pushing their unisons up so the notes sounded "in tune." Blame the wine, please. It may be a bad idea, but the sound was not always terrible. Past a certain point, of course, the note just stays flat, but I'm still playing around with this, willing to follow a bad idea to its logical conclusion just to see where the road gets muddy.)

Hi Jake, you write:

..."May I ask questions about the specifics of the unison tuning for CHas, just to be sure that I understand?

1. Kamin speaks of the unisons not matching on a single partial. How precisely are the outer strings pitched slightly differently to emphasize (through equal beating) specific partials on the center string?"...

I tune the outer strings a little wide. More precisely, while going from wide to the spot, I can hear the partials of the harmonic series. When they reduce in number, I distinguish the point where I hear the 4th, the 3rd and the 2nd.

With my lever, I go anti-clock a little more, so to end charging the pin, then I want the 2nd partial to beam with the foundamental tone of the note I'm unisoning. This, in my experience, gains the longest tone-sustain.

..."2. How far have people gone in the direction of reducing the "stretch" in tunings and using the raised unisons to reduce the perceived iH?"...

I can not answer, I simply do not know.

..."Are there specific tunings or mistunings or discussions\experiments in this direction that anyone could point me towards? ( I can imagine things like lowering the tension\diapason very slightly and then making the unisons raise the perceived pitch.)"...

I do not like raising unisons, unless I find a dead-tone, a bad key with poor sound. No clue about discussions/experiments.

..."I experimented with pushing that idea a little further one night in PianoTeq, lowering the pitch of some notes past narrowing the octaves, so some notes wavered near flat, and then pushing their unisons up so the notes sounded "in tune."...

Also in my experience, mid-register unisons raise the three-chord pich, but when you increase the string's tension you also increase the load onto the bridge, and this effects the nearby piches, especially in the high register.

..."willing to follow a bad idea to its logical conclusion just to see where the road gets muddy."

That is nice, in a way I did the same. When I could not stand anymore my flattening tunings, I left the road my ear would suggest and went for that mud. Today I can gain Chas form only if I tune a wider stretch, the Pre-form.

Regards, a.c.

.

Alfredo:

In another Topic you posted ”I'd better precise: 4ths beat very much in the bass, progressive slowering up to C3 and progressive fastening, going up. At C5 4ths collaps. 5ths go the way you say, "fastest in the middle of the piano and slower to the ends". Actually, at the ends 5ths sound pure, this gives you an idea of how slow they beat, of how little they can be narrow. But in Pre-tuning (centre string), high 5ths get wide.

OK, I seem to have misunderstood the beat rate progression of the 4ths and 5ths when you tune. This makes much more sense. When 4ths get slower, 5ths must get faster and visa versa. And the faster the 4ths are in relation to the 5ths, the wider the octave type. So the progression of 4ths and 5ths indicate the widest octave type at the ends and the narrowest in the middle.

This type of tuning is inconsistent with equal beating 12ths and 15ths which call for a general narrowing of the octave type while going up in the treble. But then, if I understand you correctly, this is the “Chas Preparatory Tuning” which when after the unisons are tuned, produces equal beating 12ths and 15ths. I did make a post a while ago about a possible explanation for how the tuning could change when tuning unison, but since I have never experienced this I am going to continue to consider this to be an “Indulgent Mystery.”

Ohi Jeff, good news.

..."When 4ths get slower, 5ths must get faster and visa versa."...

Yes, From the bass up to C3. Here, 4ths get faster and 5ths too continue to get faster up to A3-E4. I'm glad if you get this and I apologize if my English was not correct.

you write:..."This type of tuning is inconsistent with equal beating 12ths and 15ths which call for a general narrowing of the octave type while going up in the treble."...

Actually, Prepare-Chas octaves are S shaped, so 5ths from the bass can go narrower up to mid-range, then invert and go less and less narrow.

..."But then, if I understand you correctly, this is the “Chas Preparatory Tuning” which when after the unisons are tuned, produces equal beating 12ths and 15ths."...

Yes.

..."I did make a post a while ago about a possible explanation for how the tuning could change when tuning unison,"...

Sorry... maybe if I had read that.

..."but since I have never experienced this I am going to continue to consider this to be an “Indulgent Mystery.”"...

Wait Jeff. The "Indulgent Mystery" may be how ET octaves can not be progressive and how ET 12ths and 15ths can routinely (and out of rule) be inverted in the high register, i.e. what has been repeatedly written in Chas main Topic.

Also an "Indulgent Mystery" may be how 4ths and 5ths should be tuned when tempering what ever ET temperament-module, and down C3, where I'm stating that Chas 4ths invert.

Anyway, today I think I was told about quasi-ET, so for me it is not really a mystery anymore. If I may suggest, do experience the Prepare-Tuning.

a.c.

Alfredo:

Look at my post on 21.12.09, this Topic.

"S-shaped octaves" do not tell me much. But saying if the fifths become wide of just intonation does. Do the fifths become wide of just intonation or not???? Some of your posts seem to say one thing and some another. If the fifths become just, then the 12ths are wide of just unless only some octaves are narrow which would then mean that it is probably not ET.

And I am the one that gets to choose what I consider to be an "Indulgent Mystery."

http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/beats.html

Have an ear at what is presented as correctly tuned beat rates for 3 octaves C-4-5 played together :
http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/sounds/coctpart.mp3

(This is just an aside\interruption, but one that I hope I can make here for the people who are experimenting with Pianoteq. It's available at an academic discount--if you are affiliated with a school or university, there's a different pricing scale. I don't know what the adjustment is. There's a form to fill out at http://www.pianoteq.com/faq?pianoteq=e76fed63871b9bef6603314640867334 . I'm not part of Modartt, by the way. Just a user and fan. The program seems to be a natural match for these discussions. Cheers.)

Jeff, you ask:

..."Do the fifths become wide of just intonation or not?"...

Yes, on centre strings Pre-Tuning, very slowly-progressive wide. But after unisons you want 5ths to sound just.

Then, it is better to distinguish what may be needed for the piano to release Chas, from what Chas Form is, which is the point of this thread.

Whether Chas theory can be conventionally said to be ET I'd say yes, since all semitones are numerically equal in size. And in practice too, RBI are "ET" progressive.

For tuning this ET you may start following some "technical" instructions, even if in bits and peaces.

..."And I am the one that gets to choose what I consider to be an "Indulgent Mystery."...

Ok, but since it is a patent, you'll have to correspond the partials rights, 3 and 4, all together US $7.00.

- . - . - . -

...People who are experimenting with Pianoteq. It's available at an academic discount--if you are affiliated with a school or university, there's a different pricing scale.

Thanks Jake for this information and for the link above.

Regards, a.c.

Alfredo:

”Ok, but since it is a patent, you'll have to correspond the partials rights, 3 and 4, all together US $7.00.”

I will gladly pay your price for the patent rights on the term “Indulgent Mystery” next time I am in Augusta Bay. Perhaps in liquid refreshment at one of the cafes I fondly remember?

I'm still trying to learn more about the unison technique. I know that you and Kamin have explained it, and that it has a history. I'm sorry if I seem to be asking the same question several times, but:

1. If the unisons are pitched very slightly higher, so that they have partials that beat equally with partials on the center string, is their fundamental also beating against the fundamental of the center string?

2. Assuming that the answer is yes, is the perceived pitch of the "note" raised to the pitch half-way between the pitch of the center string and the pitches (which may differ) of the unisons? Which means that the perceived pitch emerges from the beating fundamentals and partials of the three strings.

3. Is it thus true to say that, in this method of tuning, there is no one string in the trichord that, if plucked, would be at the same pitch as the pitch heard when all three strings are played together?

4. The 12'ths are slightly flat across the keyboard, if I understand correctly. Should they, after the unisons are tuned in this way, be heard as just? Should some of them, at least, such as above A440?

5.Are the two outer strings usually in unison with one another (as just as possible), or are they pitched to beat with different partials on the center string. Or does this vary, according to the piano and overall tone desired?

Thanks Alfredo and Kamin. Love the sound of the pianos.

Jake:

I know your questions are to Alfredo and Isaac, but perhaps I can give another view point.

If any one partial of two strings in a unison are at the same frequency, then all the partials of the two strings of the unison are at the same frequency. This is because the strings have the same physical characteristics, and should have the same inharmonicity.

But when two or more strings of a unison are not at the same frequency when played separately, but very close, when they are played together they can "couple" or "pull' each other into vibrating in phase and at the same frequency. This can give a certain color to the tone, especially at the attack when the coupling takes place. And since the piano is really a percussion instrument the mind remembers this color and attributes it to the decay portion of the sound as well.

Jeff, good that you took me back to that post of yours.

You wrote:..."I understand that measurements of frequencies of single strings have been compared to a tuned unison with all three strings sounding together."...

Actually, beats have been compared, not frequencies. I've observed the effects of my unisoning on beats, in different registers.

..."A drop in pitch has been observed."...

Yes, like when you do voicing, in any range. Check yourself: compare a 5th (or an octave), say C5-G5, tune pure on centre strings, then unison and listen to your 5th. Is it still pure?

..."But since a higher partial is measured, I am not sure if it is the fundamental frequency that changes or if it is the effective iH of the strings that change"...

Indeed, when I unison I reinforce the pitch of the centre string. As I've explained, I go for a beam, made up by the mid-string's foundamental and its 2nd partial, gained with the outer strings outcome. In a way, the outer string can syntethize the centre string's pitch, i.e. foundamental + partials. Then, I'd say that both the foundamental frencency and the iH of the strings change.

..."and therefore the frequency of the partials and the beat rate of the tuning intervals."...

It may as well be the strengh/precense of the partials and the overall pitch.

..."This effect is an argument for tuning unisons as you go and for adding a bit of extra stretch when tuning an octave so that when the other strings of the unison are tuned the pitch will settle where it belongs."...

Yes, the pitch has to settle where it belongs, beat-wise.

..."Perhaps this is what you are experiencing rather than the piano’s tension equalizing."...

I talk about piano settlings, considering the sum of those two factors (plus the strings adjustements on their three lenghts). Increasing the string's tension involves the change of loading onto the bridge, maybe very very little but for me and Chas form it is still meaningfull. I need to control unisoning effects on closed notes too.

Fine and coherent voicing solves most problems related to the partials outcome. Thinking of a sound, can coherent timbre proportion the relevance and presence of partials? How would that effect your tuning?

a.c.

EDIT: more has been posted, I'll hopefully reply this evening.

"How would that effect your tuning?"

For the typical middle aged consoles and the old aged uprights, which is about all that I tune, not a bit. I concentrate mostly on stability and general octave stretch. The hammers are rarely in any condition to worry about tuning tone into the unisons. I just mention these things because others are also interested, not that I have much of an opportunity to use them.

But really, I don't know what you are babbling about, and please don't try to explain.

Hi Jake, you write:

..."1. If the unisons are pitched very slightly higher, so that they have partials that beat equally with partials on the center string, is their fundamental also beating against the fundamental of the center string?"...

You might have read my previous post about unisons.

Anyway, I've not mesured the partials of an outer string, after my unisoning, and compared with the partials of the centre string yet. This may answer your question.

Jeff's statement that if one partial meets, then all partials should meet, may be true in theory. In my opinion each real string has its own "irrational" story. What I know for sure is that I can reinforce the centre string's pitch, by gaining the 2nd partial of the centre string.

In other words, in the unison there is a very precise point where you hear the foundamental and its 2nd partial, the latter going absolutely straight, like if it was surfing on the foundamental. That beam gains the longest sustain.

..."2. Assuming that the answer is yes, is the perceived pitch of the "note" raised to the pitch half-way between the pitch of the center string and the pitches (which may differ) of the unisons?...

Half-way, I do not know. Generally, those unisons raise the pitch.

..."Which means that the perceived pitch emerges from the beating fundamentals and partials of the three strings."...

Definitely, the perceived pitch emerges from the fundamentals and partials of the three strings, it emerges from what is beating and what is not.

..."3. Is it thus true to say that, in this method of tuning, there is no one string in the trichord that, if plucked, would be at the same pitch as the pitch heard when all three strings are played together?"...

True. There is a sum-effect that raises the pitch of the whole trichord. Take this with a POS, as it comes only from my empirical, aural survey.

..."4. The 12'ths are slightly flat across the keyboard, if I understand correctly."...

Correct. Delta-flat all across the keyboard.

..."Should they (12ths), after the unisons are tuned in this way, be heard as just? Should some of them, at least, such as above A440?"

No, after the unisons are tuned, all 12ths must be heard delta-flat.

..."5. Are the two outer strings usually in unison with one another (as just as possible), or are they pitched to beat with different partials on the center string."...

I tune them to that beam, and I've never checked outer strings one another.

..."Or does this vary, according to the piano and overall tone desired?"...

In my tuning, I happen to pitch with different partials on bichords, or grands trichord, when I find odd strings.

..."I'm sorry if I seem to be asking the same question several times"...

You are welcome. a.c.

Thank you, Alfredo. I hope you do understand that I'm asking these questions about the unisons because I like the sound of the tuning so much.

Please dont quit, Jeff, the fact that you have to tune less than first grade instruments does not mean you cant benefit of that raised harmony. In fact I just believe the opposite, it may well give you some fun, as even uninteresting pianos get something with Chas.

The method with the felt mute and "preparatory tuning is a very good one, if you ever use a EDT you can see very easily how the strings settle and the pitch change when you are going thru the scale (unisons tuned or not).

The way you are yet tuning makes me think that you ar yet using some "auto settling" property of the tuning (be it with th 5th s or with the 12the, the instrument seem to find its correct place when it is pushed in the good direction, then tuning Chas means only using RBI to have more precision or evenness, the raised resonance put you more easily than expected in the correct pitch region.

The emphasis of 2nd partial is a help for resonance, it is just a way to listen that allow you to thicken the tone without using beats in unison (just a coupling question, to me).

I suggest you experiment on the relations of the 2nd inversion of the minor chord with the double octave of the second note. You may find some interesting thing....

Besty regards

To Jeff

I recorded ..

http://www.box.net/shared/ptfcnaommd

There you have an idea on how the beat rates are progressing, tuned on one string, and how the top note can be tuned only in the resonance of the octave, and fall in place well.

It is quiet to listen, even on a small vertical (but one need to have a thin enough strip mute there, to mute up to C6)

The piano is a120 cm vertical, good tone, Ciresa soundboard. I will record the job on a bad piano someday...

I've been making notes about tuning to CHas (an actual tuning, as opposed to the model), trying to create a list of general requirements. This list is just meant to recapitulate what I've gathered. Corrections and additions would be appreciated:

1. The bearing is set over two octaves. (NO: See below.)
2. The intervals of the two octaves are divided up equally, (NO: See below.)as much as possible, although of course iH on some pianos may require repitching some notes slightly.
3. The lowest possible partials are listened to when checking beat rates:
octaves at 2:1 , doubles at 4:1, 12ths at 3:1 ; 5ths at 3:2 not using the checks that compare 2 fast beating intervals, as the M6 M17th to check the 12th size.
4. Double octaves and 12ths beat equally.
5. Double octaves are very slightly wide.
6. 12ths are very slightly narrow from A4 to the top. (NO: See below.)
7. Octaves beat very slightly wider as they move to each end of the keyboard. (NO: See below.)
8. But the 12th's remain slightly narrow from A4 to the top. Moving towards the bass, they widen. (NO: See below.)
9. M5's become just or nearly just in the upper regions.
10. 4ths become more narrow as they approach the top. (Not exactly: See below. They become less wide.)
11. Unisons are often very slightly wide to reinforce the 2nd partial.
12. Resonance is to be preferred to power: Although the bearing\temperament octave (three octaves in CHas) is slightly wide of theoretical ET, the upper keyboard is often "milder," than many contemporary ET's, since lower partials are listened to for beats. (Partly right. See below.)

Hi Jake, thanks for this list, a valid contribute. Since I do not know how to control the editing, I'll write some CORRECTIONS/ADDITIONS with capital letters.

..."I've been making notes about tuning to CHas (an actual tuning, as opposed to the model), trying to create a list of general requirements. This list is just meant to recapitulate what I've gathered. Corrections and additions would be appreciated:

1. The bearing is set over THREE OR MORE octaves (FROM C6 DOWN TO STRINGS CROSSING, ON CENTRE STRINGS).
2. The intervals OF THESE octaves are divided up equally, as much as possible, although of course iH on some pianos may require repitching some notes slightly.
3. The lowest possible partials are listened to when checking beat rates:
octaves at 2:1 , doubles at 4:1, 12ths at 3:1 ; 5ths at 3:2 not using the checks that compare 2 fast beating intervals, as the M6 M17th to check the 12th size.
4. Double octaves and 12ths beat equally.
5. Double octaves are very slightly wide, CONSTANT ALL ALONG THE KEYBOARD.
6. 12ths are very slightly narrow, CONSTANT ALL ALONG THE KEYBOARD .
7. Octaves beat very slightly (PROGRESSIVE) wider as they move to each end of the keyboard.
8. But the 12th's remain slightly narrow, AND CONSTANT ALL ALONG THE KEYBOARD
9. M5's become PROGRESSIVELY just or nearly just in the upper regions.
10. 4ths become LESS WIDE as they approach C3.
11. Unisons are PREFERABLY very slightly wide to reinforce the 2nd partial.
12.(SUSTAIN) Resonance is to be preferred to (ATTACK) power: Although the bearing\temperament octave (THREE+ octaves in CHas) is slightly wide of theoretical ET, the upper keyboard is often "milder," than many contemporary ET's, since lower partials are listened to for beats."

- . - . - . -

I do not know if Point 12 is correct. I could say … “Although the bearing\temperament octave (THREE+ octaves in CHas) is slightly wide of theoretical (historical?) ET, the upper keyboard is often "milder," than many (?) (there seem to be two, Cordier's and Stopper's) THEORETICAL contemporary ET's, since the Chas octave is less stretched.”

Unfortunally, I do not know which partials would Cordier or Stopper listen to, I could not get their aural tuning sequence either.

Regards, a.c.

Hi Alfredo,
I attempted implementing your above techniques as closely as possible during my tunings on Saturday on both upright and grand pianos.

The most difficult part I found was controlling the openness of the unisons against the openness of stretch I chose for the octaves up the register.

The bearing section I expanded was C3-C4, using A-440 as the mark. Normally, I use F3-A4.

After the tunings, I played several different pieces of music and on each different piano, the salesman in charge of the showroom commented very positively, that he liked it. Because I had been using a different method, CHAS felt different, sounded different. When I was at the piano playing, it sounded in-tune, but loose to me. When I was at the other end of the showroom and the salesman was playing - the tuning sounded very lively, pure and most of all, musical and resonant - a whole piano sound, not just intervals strung together (which as a novice tuner I've been consumed with)

My preference is for a slightly tighter sound, but this method allows me to experiment with the piano's "whole sound", rather than simply listening to intervals. I still check outside 6ths against inside 3ds, then a quick check of 10ths and 17ths up the register as it pertains evenness of the stretch. The precise evenness of beat progression up the register is sometimes altered by the piano itself, I suppose inHarmonicity, false beats, and lack of experience on my part, are the culprits.

Did you receive my tuning sample with checks? Thanks for the descriptions of your methods.

Glen

Many thanks, Alfredo.

Hi Glen,

I'm glad for your positive feedback. And your approach, trying different techniques, can only open to the best for all of us.

Though my tuning routine is related to strings loadings onto the bridge, I do not think it is a must. What is important is to know what to go for and why.

For instance, the little variations in loadings could be evaluated in other ways, depending on your idea of the sound-board's elasticity or your strings and structure settlings technique. My evaluation is not proposed as the best.

..."The most difficult part I found was controlling the openness of the unisons against the openness of stretch I chose for the octaves up the register."...

Unisons raise the pitch, but the increase in strings tension does load more onto the bridge, so eventually experience will help.

..."The bearing section I expanded was C3-C4, using A-440 as the mark. Normally, I use F3-A4."...

Did you mean C3-A4?

..."After the tunings, I played several different pieces of music and on each different piano, the salesman in charge of the showroom commented very positively, that he liked it. Because I had been using a different method, CHAS felt different, sounded different."...

Still today I'm surprised by the effects of this beating form, both for the "in tune" feeling and the resonance power. A small piano too gains so much brightness and volume, like if it was double in lenth.

.."My preference is for a slightly tighter sound, but this method allows me to experiment with the piano's "whole sound", rather than simply listening to intervals."...

Yes, the whole sound is relevant. Today I do not make a distinction between the first temperament-octave and the whole keyboard.

..."The precise evenness of beat progression up the register is sometimes altered by the piano itself, I suppose inHarmonicity, false beats, and lack of experience on my part, are the culprits."...

If you are tuning with beats, do not submit to iH. You'll be able to lay down your favorite tuning form by imposing beats coherence for all intervals.

..."Did you receive my tuning sample with checks? Thanks for the descriptions of your methods."...

I did receive your samples and listened to them. Progressions can be improved, but they are already good standard. One point: when you check the intervals progression go slowly and regularly, do not change the choromatic sequence's rhythm, you risk to confuse the increasing (or decreasing) beat rate you want, with your increasing (or decreasing) playing rhythm.

Our tendency (O) is to hear what we would like to hear, being sort of "generous" with ourselves. If you can, be severe and always ready and willing to perfect your Real beat hearing. Choromatic 12ths are easy to evaluate, and vivid and reliable too.

Let us know. a.c.

Kamin:

When you can, could you tell what mic or mics you're using for your various recordings of CHas, and where you are putting the mic in relation to the piano?

Greetings, Alfredo ~~

Loading the strings on the bridge is a fine concept, and something to take into account as it pertains to string/pin setting for tuning stability and resonance. Mushy pinblocks on some of the pianos means one has to work harder to get any feedback.

Yes, experience over the next few hundred or so tunings will be a big help in terms of accuracy, consistency, and efficiency.

I did mean C3-A4. I will look into further expanding the bearing to C3-C5. My preference is to begin stretching octaves up the register as much as possible. The trick is to make the stretch consistent. This will take a great deal more experience.

I agree - the tempered (bearing) section is just that and it has to blend in with the rest of the stretch.

Good catch on the check sample...I did have a tendency to speed up the interval check speed as the beat rates increased...I also have a tendency when I play to speed up in fortissimo and slow down in pianissimo!

Chromatic 12ths are a good check to ensure those intervals are not too narrow or wide. It is an easy check.

No question, and I am of the philosophy that the best sounding temperament in the world is useless without perfect unisons.

I'll let you know how it goes...this weekend I have 5 scheduled tunings.

Thank you, again, again!

Glen

Ran across this article (may be well-known) which has a section on the relative pitches of unisons. Interesting reflections on how unison offsets affect M3's, etc. See the section "The Effect of Multiple Stringing on the Sound of the Piano," about 1/4 into the essay. However, unisons in general are discussed, without regard to the octaves in which they are pitched:

http://www.zainea.com/piano%20sound.htm

(This isn't really related to the pretuning sequence for CHas, of course, but instead to the final tuning.)

The issue reported by GP and quoted below is a recurrent phenomenon. It may suggest to hold the strings loadings and adjustements, the pins charge and the piano settlings and Time in due consideration. These factors are as relevant as the tuning form itself (O).

..."Here is what I have noticed these last 5 tunings...since I received the piano in 2007......when I go back to tune the whole piano, the upper 2 treble sections are the worst. The very top treble is not nearly as bad as the section below it. In fact, that top section is quite stable in unisons and pitch.

The section that is a problem, between D#5-G6, that section constantly goes flat first before any other section, and the unisons drift out first there before any other section....that's why we pounded down the pins, thinking that would help. For example, after tuning from bass to treble, that problematic area, after 1 or 2 pieces that really pound the piano, that section is already somewhat flat! Then slowly, the more the piano is played, the whole piano starts to drift flat, it never seems to go sharp."...

Regards, a.c.

.

..."The PTG convention in 2011 will be held in Kansas City, his (Kent Swafford's) home and the home of PTG. It may be a good idea to plan for that event, to present your idea, mine and that of Alfredo Capurso at that time, perhaps at some kind of "side show" where three very similar pianos can be tuned in each style. Let the audience and musicians give their comments and approval or disapproval to each without them knowing which piano is tuned in which way."...

I thank you, Bill, for your proposal, I'll be glad to enjoy our real tunings.

As you know, I'm also trying to share a new Temperamental Theory and a modern ET model deriving from a new approach to beats and resonance.

In another forum, one colleague was asking for a short description to help to focus on the important principles, to understand the system more quickly. I hope this can help:

About Chas pre-tuning method and sequence:

- the use of all intervals for an ET where all intervals are progressive
- the use of low partials beats for reducing iH's influence
- not counting but comparing beats (progressive and even beating ones)
- guessing only the first octave for eventually perfect it
- drawing a more accentuated stretch curve for compensating the piano's adjustments (let the piano get the form)
- inverting the beat rate progression of 5ths for eventually gaining even beating 12ths (narrow) and 15ths (wide) all along the keyboard.

About Chas system's theory:

- the static zero-beating approach is replaced with "stable dynamism"
- zero-beating "pure" intervals do not equal "more consonant"
- beats return the strings partials qualities, so giving character and tension (read colour) to each single interval
- no interval needs to be beat-less
- all intervals (all partials) can compromise for a geometric Optimum, for a resonant and stable beating whole
- flows of beats and outcoming partials determine infinite sound atmospheres.

This is also what I would really like to talk about, I would like to explain Chas whole ratio, why and how any scale practical arrangement (including your EBVT, Patrick's EBVT + pure 12ths, and so on) can eventually depart from this balanced geometrical entity in the most natural (and human) way.

I'll be very happy if PTG will promote wider understanding of this theory and I'll welcome any form of collaboration or support that you may personally be able to offer.

Regards, a.c. 

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

CHAS Tuning MP3 on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv
.

Hello.

From Ernest Unrau (R.P.T - C.A.P.T - CANADA) we receive the Flow Chart describing Chas Pre-Tuning sequence:

http://api.ning.com/files/DWLXHPDu0*UDEYxdq5G3IqO5z6EC08cwgCNjc1bPYFkj*S9JQvW2c9Rz*UNZM02v0r-GsgtwUjBp2ECV88YyrKP5sfkbz-NO/CHAS_PrepSeqFlowChart.pdf

I thank you very much, Ernest, as I'm sure yours is one more relevant, best motivating contribution.

Regards, a.c.

I'll like to reply to what Bill Bremmer writes:

..."The hammer technique I use avoids the bending and twisting of the tuning pin and causes the entire string segment to move simultaneously. Frankly, the notion that one must "feel" the pin moving only means that you are twisting it and therefore have to go through more effort to undo that.

I will be interested to read what you say has been written recently by Jim Coleman, however. When I teach my students, I tell them that the string is elastic, like a rubber band (indeed the French word for that is «un élastique»). The tuning pin is like a spring. If one "turns" the pin slowly, one does feel it move, yes but at the same time, one is inevitably putting a twist or torque into it. The change in tension upon the speaking length happens and we can hear that or the ETD reads it but there is some residual parts of the string which may not have responded, there also may be more tension between the tuning pin and the first bearing point. If that that tension gets to high in an attempt to raise the pitch of the string, it will break.

So, I firmly believe in what I learned so many years ago, that an impact movement of the tuning hammer is the most efficient and mechanically correct movement. If it were really necessary to "feel" the pin moving as many technicians claim (I know that many, if not most have been taught that), it would mean that the impact style tuning hammer is a worthless tool. Clearly, this is not true for some of the finest technicians I know use one. Dean Reyburn is one of them. He designed and markets such a tool. One does not "feel" the pin move as is described and claimed to be essential. Therefore, I don't believe it is essential. I actually believe it is counter productive, even potentially damaging."

- . - . - . -

I cannot write tonight but if you colleagues want to elaborate on this..."impact movement"? or "feel the pin", and charge it for counter-balancing the string's tension?

Regards, a.c.

Hello Alfredo,

What you have shown to me and that looks like those old basic "first lesson in tuning : untwist the pin, raise the pitch, then twist it back a little" took sense, in the way it make the differnce between a basically settled system, and a system wich is at the same time settled hard as stone, and charged with the utmost tension.

To get there with more fast tuning hammer technique it is necessary to come back again and again to wedge the appropriate tension in the system until it is charged to the top.

The other way to settle as strong is to use much more heavy blows, but then the precision of the tuning lowers, and for many reasons I avoid playing too hard.

As I stated the tone is the main reason why I appreciate that "basic way" , but having a precise control on pitch while at the same time finding the utmost settling was an eye opener (or may I say an ear ?)

That said it serves me to know what I am doing wand what level of precision/stability I will access, while tuning with my more usual way (faster !).

In any case the good sensations thru the tuning hammer are what provide us control on the output, to the last 10ths of cst. I learned to wedge and to shim micro moves of the bottom of the pin, when using EDT's and working on pianos that where tuned once or twice a day. The need is differnet when doing a yearly tuning indeed, and I liked the idea to have mostly top evaluate how the soundboard and bridge is accepting the new tension.

Lot of confidence and good sensations !

Be well, I hope other colleagues will shime in, generlaly spêaking not many tuners like to speak of basic tuning technique, most often fancy tricks , while basics are left as if what was shown to us in our early age was of little value !

I'd say that simply we where not able to understand it all at that moment, that is all !

Best regards

The problem I think GP has with the 5th and 6th octaves is that it needs a pitch raise first in that section of the piano and like many technicians, he wants to avoid the necessary preliminary pass. This is very common. The task of tuning is so difficult that doing it once is arduous enough but to have to do it twice is beyond contemplation.

The piano has very tight tuning pins and a Wapin bridge (3 pins in it instead of two). If that whole section is even just two cents flat and each string is only raise to target pitch, by the time the section is finished, it would already be expected to be 0.5 cents flat. If, by the twisting motion of the tuning hammer, some clockwise torque has been placed in the tuning pin and there is residual unequalized tension across the bridge pins and duplex sections, that residual tension will resolve, the tuning pin will untwist and the whole section, especially with the hard playing by the player system, will end up very near where it started.

So, I recommended as a pitch raise technique, each string should be tuned even sharper than is usually recommended, such as 1 cent for each 2 cents the section is flat. The pitch raise function does not need to be done with the same amount of precision as fine tuning, just something approximate and therefore not as painstaking and stressful. When the pitch raise has been completed, give each key at least three very hard test blows. Then sample some strings from that section again. If most strings are now correct or within a very close range such as +/- 0.5 cents, it should accept a fine tuning. If they are still mostly all flat, unfortunately a pitch raise correction must again be performed. One must also be careful not to over correct. If everything is too sharp, it will tend to climb again when lowered.

I am not expecting that GP could learn to use the impact type hammer technique that I use. He is a novice tuner. He knows only how to "turn" the tuning pin until the pattern on the ETD stands still. This is OK but it must be understood that if everything is flat, just raising each string until the ETD says it is right will inevitably result in the whole thing going flat again in short order.

The 5th and 6th octaves are more sensitive to that than the rest of the piano. There is moderate tension there and that part of the scale is used more than the very highest and lowest parts of the piano. The wound strings are far less apt to go flat in the same way. There is a combination of just enough length of string, moderate tension and heavy use to cause them to go flat easily. The high treble has shorter and higher tensioned strings. The low tenor and midrange has longer strings and lower tension.

I often do three passes in the midrange and treble for the highest quality concert tuning I do (such as last Friday on the Steinway). Even though the piano was only slightly flat (generally about 3 cents), if all I did was to raise each string to the target pitch one time, the tuning would end up quite flawed. This would be regardless of how I did it, whether to use a strip mute or a single wedge and regardless of how well I settled each string as I went. I would only be deceiving myself if I thought otherwise.

I have often heard technicians claim that "strip mutes don't work" but if each unison is tuned as a whole while proceeding, "they all stay". This is only wishful thinking. The unisons may be solid but if one goes back to the ETD program to see if each unison is locked on to the target pitch to within a tolerance of 0.1 cents, the truth will be revealed. Aurally, it won't test out as desired either.

To try to change the pitch of the piano and fine tune it simultaneously is only "fighting" with the piano. The piano will always win the fight and the technician will lose. I can tune a piano twice in 45 minutes and have better, more stable results than most people will have who "fight" with the piano for an hour and a half. That is because I know how the piano will behave and I make a preliminary correction that anticipates how it will behave.

Isaac, what you did not see in that video and was perhaps some of the reason for your criticism is that the video itself was really only about the double octave and octave-5th comparison. I first showed that I tuned single octaves just slightly wide. In any typical circumstance, none of the strings would be expected to be close enough to accept a fine tuning in just one pass using a muting strip. What I would normally have done is to tune slightly wide octaves all the way to the top, quickly without too much precision, the flatter the string is, in fact, the sharper I would tune it. I would then pull in all of the unisons, again, without a great amount of precision. I would then give the entire section a series of test blows.

The expected result would be that now, each string would be within a range that would accept a fine tuning, most already in tune, a few slightly sharp, a few slightly flat but no general trend either way. If it is the highest level of performance tuning, I automatically consider that the second pass will still not be quite enough for rock solid stability. I make the corrections, tune the unisons again and start the whole process again. I expect that upon the third pass, very little has to be done and therefore it usually takes very little time. I am able to catch the few strings here or there which resisted being settled absolutely and spend the time "fighting" with them at that point, not in the beginning.

That is what puts the glowing smile on the face of the artist as he performs. I have seen it often. I know what works for me and how to get a rock solid, broadcast quality sound that will hold up through a performance with little stress and sometimes in amazingly little time. The last time that Kawai RX-3 was on stage for that young artist, the set up and sound check people were taking much longer than they had anticipated. When I was finally called to the stage, I had a two pass tuning of the piano which was not bad and basically on pitch done in exactly 35 minutes. The crew was still milling around taking care of details. I left them plenty of time to do their final sound check. If I had dwelt on each tuning pin, twisting, turning, pounding, correcting and re-correcting one unison at a time with a single wedge, I would have taken at least twice as long and been very stressed out. As it was, I finished my job, wished them a good show and took the nearly hour drive back home.

Bill, you kindly write:

..."When I teach my students, I tell them that the string is elastic, like a rubber band (indeed the French word for that is «un élastique»). The tuning pin is like a spring."...

Talking about "elasticity", spring and rubber, I thought this may help some further evaluations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticity_(solid_mechanics)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis

Regards, a.c.

Hello,

I tend to believe that the whole piano's structure has a tendency to react slowly to an outside force (Hysteresis, linked above).

At about 2/3 of the page linked below, I've found a nice simulation that in my opinion can describe what happens when we turn the pin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bending

Considering the string's tension, I think it may be advisable to feel and "charge the pin", when possible, with vertical bending (towards the string) and torsional bending (anticlock). By doing so we can counterbalance the pulling of the string and heavy playing stresses. In fact, these pin Vs string opposing forces can determine a more stable tuning.

Moreover, string and pin will result notted, (or glued, fused?) and so more energy can be transferred to the pin-block.

So, impacting or charging? One question: what will eventually make the pin's hole oval?

a.c.

impact have the supposed advantage of moving the whole pin with minimal torsion.

Using EDT s, one have always a tendency not to raise above pitch as much as in aural tuning, hence the development of special methods and techniques to just add a very little o so the display is happy.

Stability wise, while one can get a good stability with those methods, they are not "rock stable" because the grip of the pin is not so low in the blow. If it was only for stability, I would not use that slow method, that allow the piano and wire to take its "definitive place", but the gain in tone is really important (be it a vertical with bushings or a Steinway grand).

So I present myself as the slowest tuner in Paris, and thats it !


Despite the huge amount of pressure I use sometime on the lever, I am frankly not under the impression that I stress the block a lot with pressure (with wedging moves certainly it can make more trouble if they are not localized) What will make the block unusable is ovalisation on the bottom part; and I certainly did not notice that on pianos I tune regularly.

I guess that aiming to tune with a tuning pin which is "charged " to the max is a very good thing, I doubt that the charging unload, you may find it there on the next tuning. The idea that the pin is twisted some amount in the block is on page four of the book "many strokes" presented as a basis for the pin setting (which by evidence it is.

Piano a wire settling time is unfortunately not compressible, to me, if anyone have an idea on how to shorten that time I will accept it happily !

As I said my real internal feeling with the way I tune usually, is that "everything is evened so even if the wire move it will stay just enough, the unisons having a good acoustical stability will help the note to stay tuned " (and I think like that while having stetted the pin correctly, simply I was unsure of the real bottom position of the pin I only know I have some torsion, no idea on how deep it goes.

Trying the tone and the sensations obtained with the slow torsion and moving of the pin as showed in the videos I made, will convince you of the difference :
the tone is clearer
the tuning pin get stiffer,no more high motion of the tone with up or low pressure on the handle, only a very light move in the tone.

Some tuning pins slips on reverse (moving up) eventually , if the pitch have been raised frankly too much.

If when "charging" the pin you feel it split even a little, that mean that the bottom is not yet in its definitive place. If you set the pin in that position the tone is not as good, but , more important there is a "trap" in that tuning pin, which is twisted in the top part and unlocked in the bottom, you can feel it clearly when you untwist that pin and lower the note to do the whole process again :
at first the pin set again an again and seem to lock, then it unlock abruptly and then the note is way lower than you have believed, showing how much that bottom move of the pin is important for tone and pitch.

IF the block is not very strong, i noticed that doing the process 2 or3 times (SLOWLY) finally the bottom of the pin in the end find a better grip, it get better and better, may be moving the pin one direction then the other disturb the wood fiber and help to find better grip.

But the grip and knot that we can install in the upper part of the pin may be related to the bottom position if you want a definitive setting.

Of course the concepts that You state, Alfredo, are completely valid, the piano react and need time to find its new stability. THe pin react (probably) the wire, of course, the soundboard, the plate etc.. Being aware of that is yet something.

When we play the note so often waiting for the settling to take place, it is strange but we can hear the wire taking its place.

I guess I will do a video showing how I tune extra fast and how I tune with extra strong settling.

BTW I managed to tune with a more closed tone than yours, giving all the energy to the attack and leaving the piano find its tone by itself for the rest, and I like it, it provide more tactile sensations to the pianist hence a larger dynamic palette. On a piano with not so rich tone due to old strings (I've done it yesterday with some at last 50 years old wire) that gives very pleasing results.

The open but strong tone of the attack is also to me the sign of some stability. It does not mean the unisons are not smiling but a hair less than in your tone. I recorded a few notes (vertical Pleyel, 1930)

Bets regards to all !

Isaac

Hello Isaac,

You write:..."impact have the supposed advantage of moving the whole pin with minimal torsion."...

I think you are right, since the pin would have no time for torquing. But then, in this case, I'd have to charge a "cold" pin, without knowing what its bottom position is.

..."Using EDT s, one have always a tendency not to raise above pitch as much as in aural tuning, hence the development of special methods and techniques to just add a very little so the display is happy."...

The tendency I've noticed also in aural tuning is to get by with a fairly correct pitch, no matter how the pin is positioned. In my opinion, the correct pitch should result from the best pin position, i.e. from a correctly charged pin.

..."Stability wise, while one can get a good stability with those methods, they are not "rock stable" because the grip of the pin is not so low in the blow."...

I doubt about good stability with those methods, the pin is bound to bend and twist towards the string's relaxation.

..."If it was only for stability, I would not use that slow method, that allow the piano and wire to take its "definitive place", but the gain in tone is really important (be it a vertical with bushings or a Steinway grand)."...

Yes, stability may not be good for business, though I've found it foundamental for working on the tuning form.

..."So I present myself as the slowest tuner in Paris, and thats it!"...

To me, slow is better. Then we can master the most correct movement and execute it fast. All schools teach this, nothing new.

..."Piano and wire settling time is unfortunately not compressible, to me, if anyone have an idea on how to shorten that time I will accept it happily!"...

You are right (too often I can only agree with you). Playing the piano, single notes and chords, while we are tuning is the only way I know.

..."Trying the tone and the sensations obtained with the slow torsion and moving of the pin as showed in the videos I made, will convince you of the difference: the tone is clearer,
the tuning pin get stiffer, no more high motion of the tone with up or low pressure on the handle, only a very light move in the tone."...

I missed the video, can I find it somewhere?

..."Some tuning pins slips on reverse (moving up) eventually , if the pitch have been raised frankly too much.

If when "charging" the pin you feel it split even a little, that mean that the bottom is not yet in its definitive place. If you set the pin in that position the tone is not as good, but , more important there is a "trap" in that tuning pin, which is twisted in the top part and unlocked in the bottom, you can feel it clearly when you untwist that pin and lower the note to do the whole process again : at first the pin set again an again and seem to lock, then it unlock abruptly and then the note is way lower than you have believed, showing how much that bottom move of the pin is important for tone and pitch."...

What you are sharing is as precious as true.(O)

..."But the grip and knot that we can install in the upper part of the pin may be related to the bottom position if you want a definitive setting.

Of course the concepts that You state, Alfredo, are completely valid, the piano react and need time to find its new stability. THe pin react (probably) the wire, of course, the soundboard, the plate etc.. Being aware of that is yet something.

When we play the note so often waiting for the settling to take place, it is strange but we can hear the wire taking its place."...

I agree.

..."BTW I managed to tune with a more closed tone than yours, giving all the energy to the attack and leaving the piano find its tone by itself for the rest, and I like it, it provide more tactile sensations to the pianist hence a larger dynamic palette. On a piano with not so rich tone due to old strings (I've done it yesterday with some at last 50 years old wire) that gives very pleasing results."...

I'm looking forward to hearing the tone you like the best, no doubt about superb results...Is it warmer now in Paris?

Thank you very much, Isaac, and regards, a.c.

Isaac Oleg (France) has offered the French translation (+ comments) of Chas sequence flow chart, first elaborated by Ernest Unrau (Canada).

It is available here:

http://www.chas.it/Docs/traduction%20CHAS%20preparatoire.pdf

Regards, a.c.

CHAS Tuning MP3 - Amatorial recording on a Steinway S (5’ 1”, 155 cm)
http://www.box.net/shared/od0d7506cv

CHAS THEORY - RESEARCH REPORT BY G.R.I.M. (Department of Mathematics, University of Palermo, Italy):

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Quaderno19_Capurso_09_engl.pdf

To All,

....((( MERRY XMAS )))....


Regards, a.c.


HISTORICAL ET AND MODERN ETs:
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1559204/18.html
.